Letter 45: To `Uthman ibn Hunayf al-Ansari

To `Uthman ibn Hunayf al-Ansari who was Amir al-mu' minin's Governor of Basrah, when he came to know that the people of that place had invited `Uthman to a banquet and he had attended.

ومن كتاب له (عليه السلام)

إلى عثمان بن حنيف الانصاري

وهو عامله على البصرة، وقد بلغه أنه دعي إلى وليمة قوم من أهلها، فمضى إليهم

O Ibn Hunayf, I have come to know that a young man of Basrah invited you to a feast and you leapt towards it. Foods of different colours were being chosen for you and big bowls were being given to you. I never thought that you would accept the feast of a people who turn out the beggars and invite the rich. Look at the morsels you take, leave out that about which you are in doubt and take that about which you are sure that it has been secured lawfully.

أَمَّا بَعْدُ، يَابْنَ حُنَيْف، فَقَدْ بَلَغَنِي أَنَّ رَجُلاً مِنْ فِتْيَةِ أَهْلِ الْبَصْرَةِ دَعَاكَ إلى مَأْدُبَة، فَأَسْرَعْتَ إِلَيْهَا، تُسْتَطَابُ لَكَ الاْلْوَانُ، وَتُنْقَلُ إِلَيْكَ الْجِفَانُ، وَمَا ظَنَنْتُ أَنَّكَ تُجِيبُ إِلى طَعَامِ قَوْم، عَائِلُهُمْ مَجْفُوٌّ وَغَنِيُّهُمْ مَدْعُوٌّ. فَانْظُرْ إِلَى مَا تَقْضَمُهُ مِنْ هذَ الْمَقْضَمِ، فَمَا اشْتَبَهَ عَلَيْكَ عِلْمُهُ فَالْفِظْهُ، وَمَا أَيْقَنْتَ بِطِيبِ وُجُوهِهِ فَنَلْ مِنْهُ

Remember that every follower has a leader whom he follows and from the effulgence of whose knowledge he takes light. Realize that your Imam has contented himself with two shabby pieces of cloth out of the (comforts of the) world and two loaves for his meal. Certainly, you cannot do so but at least support me in piety, exertion, chastity and uprightness, because, by Allah, I have not treasured any gold out of your world nor amassed plentiful wealth nor collected any clothes other than the two shabby sheets.

أَلاَ وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ مَأمُوم إِمَاماً، يَقْتَدِي بِهِ، وَيَسْتَضِيءُ بِنُورِ عِلْمِهِ. أَلاَ وَإِنَّ إِمَامَكُمْ قَدِ اكْتَفَى مِنْ دُنْيَاهُ بِطِمْرَيْهِ، وَمِنْ طُعْمِهِ بِقُرْصَيْهِ. أَلاَ وَإِنَّكُمْ لاَ تَقْدِرُونَ عَلَى ذلِكَ، وَلكِنْ أَعِينُوني بِوَرَع وَاجْتِهَاد، وَعِفَّة وَسَدَاد فَوَاللهِ مَا كَنَزْتُ مِنْ دُنْيَاكُمْ تِبْراً، وَلاَ ادَّخَرْتُ مِنْ غَنَائِمِهَا وَفْراً، وَلاَ أَعْدَدْتُ لِبَالِي ثَوْبِي طِمْراً

Of course, all that we had in our possession under this sky was Fadak, but a group of people felt greedy for it and the other party withheld themselves from it. Allah is, after all, the best arbiter. What shall I do: Fadak,1 or no Fadak, while tomorrow this body is to go into the grave in whose darkness its traces will be destroyed and (even) news of it will disappear? It is a pit that, even if its width is widened or the hands of the digger make it broad and open, the stones and clods of clay will narrow it and the falling earth will close its aperture. I try to keep myself engaged in piety so that on the day of great fear it will be peaceful and steady in slippery places.

بَلَى! كَانَتْ في أَيْدِينَا فَدَكٌ مِنْ كلِّ مَا أَظَلَّتْهُ السَّماءُ، فَشَحَّتْ عَلَيْهَا نُفُوسُ قَوْم، وَسَخَتْ عَنْهَا نُفُوسُ آخَرِينَ، وَنِعْمَ الْحَكَمُ اللهُ. وَمَا أَصْنَعُ بِفَدَك وَغَيْرِ فَدَك، وَالنَّفْسُ مَظَانُّهَا فِي غَد جَدَثٌ، تَنْقَطِعُ فِي ظُلْمَتِهِ آثَارُهَا، وَتَغِيبُ أَخْبَارُهَا، وَحُفْرَةٌ لَوْ زِيدَ فِي فُسْحَتِهَا، وَأَوْسَعَتْ يَدَا حَافِرِهَا، لاَضْغَطَهَا الْحَجَرُ وَالْمَدَرُ، وَسَدَّ فُرَجَهَا التُّرَابُ الْمُتَرَاكِمُ، وَإِنَّمَا هِيَ نَفْسِي أَرُوضُهَا بِالتَّقْوَى لِتَأْتِيَ آمِنَةً يَوْمَ الْخَوْفِ الاْكْبَرِ، وَتَثْبُتَ عَلَى جَوَانِبِ الْمَزْلَقِ

If I wished I could have taken the way leading towards (worldly pleasures like) pure honey, fine wheat and silk clothes but it cannot be that my passions lead me and greed take me to choosing good meals while in the Hijaz or in Yamamah there may be people who have no hope of getting bread or who do not have a full meal. Shall I lie with a satiated belly while around me there may be hungry bellies and thirsty livers? Or shall I be as the poet has said:

It is enough for you to have a disease that you lie with your belly full while around you people may be badly yearning for dried leather.

وَلَوْ شِئْتُ لاَهْتَدَيْتُ الطَّرِيقَ، إِلَى مُصَفَّى هذَا الْعَسَلِ، وَلُبَابِ هذَا الْقَمْحِ، وَنَسَائِجِ هذَا الْقَزِّ، وَلكِنْ هَيْهَاتَ أَنْ يَغْلِبَنِي هَوَايَ، وَيَقُودَنِي جَشَعِي إِلَى تَخَيُّرِ الاْطْعِمَةِ ـ وَلَعَلَّ بِالْحِجَازِ أَوِ بِالْـيَمَامَةِ مَنْ لاَطَمَعَ لَهُ فِي الْقُرْصِ، وَلاَ عَهْدَ لَهُ بِالشِّبَعِ ـ أَوْ أَبِيتَ مِبْطَاناً وَحَوْلِي بُطُونٌ غَرْثَى وَأَكْبَادٌ حَرَّى، أَوْ أَكُونَ كَمَا قَالَ الْقَائِلُ :

وَحَسْبُكَ دَاءً أَنْ تَبِيتَ بِبِطْنَة * وَحَوْلَكَ أَكْبَادٌ تَحِنُّ إِلَى الْقِدِّ

Shall I be content with being called `Amir al-mu 'minin' (The Commander of the Believers), although I do not share with the people the hardships of the world? Or shall I be an example for them in the distresses of life? I have not been created to keep myself busy in eating good foods like the tied animal whose only worry is his fodder or like a loose animal whose activity is to swallow. It fills its belly with its feed and forgets the purpose behind it. Shall I be left uncontrolled to pasture freely, or draw the rope of misguidance or roam aimlessly in the paths of bewilderment?

أَأَقْنَعُ مِنْ نَفْسِي بِأَنْ يُقَالَ: أَمِيرُالْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَلاَ أُشَارِكُهُمْ فِي مَكَارِهِ الدَّهْرِ، أَوْ أَكُونَ أُسْوَةً لَهُمْ فِي جُشُوبَةِ الْعَيْشِ! فَمَا خُلِقْتُ لِيَشْغَلَنِي أَكْلُ الطَّيِّبَاتِ، كَالْبَهِيمَةِ الْمَرْبُوطَةِ هَمُّهَا عَلَفُهَا، أَوِ الْمُرْسَلَةِ شُغُلُهَا تَقَمُّمُهَا، تَكْتَرِشُ مِنْ أَعْلاَفِهَا، وَتَلْهُو عَمَّا يُرَادُ بِهَا، أَوْ أُتْرَكَ سُدىً، أَوْ أُهْمَلَ عَابِثاً، أَوْ أَجُرَّ حَبْلَ الضَّلاَلَةِ، أَوْ أَعْتَسِفَ طَرِيقَ الْمَتَاهَةِ !

I see as if one of you would say that if this is what the son of Abi Talib eats then weakness must have made him unfit to fight his foes and encounter the brave. Remember that the tree of the forest is the best for timber, while green twigs have soft bark, and the wild bushes are very strong for burning and slow in dying off. My relation with the Messenger of Allah is that of one branch with another, or of the forearm with the upper arm. By Allah, if the Arabs join together to fight me I will not run away from them and if I get the opportunity I will hasten to catch them by their necks. I shall surely strive to relieve the earth of this man of perverse mind and uncouth body, till the bits of earth are removed from the grain.

وَكَأَنِّي بِقَائِلِكُمْ يَقُولُ: إِذَا كَانَ هذَا قُوتُ ابْنِ أَبِي طَالِب، فَقَدْ قَعَدَ بِهِ الضَّعْفُ عَنْ قِتَالِ الاْقْرَانِ وَمُنَازَلَةِ الشُّجْعَانِ. أَلاَ وَإِنَّ الشَّجَرَةَ الْبَرِّيَّةَ أَصْلَبُ عُوداً، وَالْرَّوَائِعَ الْخَضِرَةَ أَرَقُّ جُلُوداً، وَالنَّابِتَاتِ العِذْيَةَ أَقْوَى وَقُوداً، وَأَبْطَأُ خُمُوداً، وَأَنَا مِنْ رَسُولِ اللهِ (صلى الله عليه وآله) كَالصِّنْوِ مِنَ الصِّنْوِ، وَالذِّرَاعِ مِنَ الْعَضُدِ. وَاللهِ لَوْ تَظَاهَرَتِ الْعَرَبُ عَلَى قِتَالِي لَمَا وَلَّيْتُ عَنْهَا، وَلَوْ أَمْكَنَتِ الْفُرَصُ مِنْ رِقَابِهَا لَسَارَعْتُ إِلَيْهَا، سَأَجْهَدُ فِي أَنْ أُطَهِّرَ الاْرضَ مِنْ هذَا الشَّخْصِ الْمَعْكُوسِ، وَالْجِسْمِ الْمَرْكُوسِ، حَتَّى تَخْرُجَ الْمَدَرَةُ مِنْ بَيْنِ حَبِّ الْحَصِيدِ

A part of the same which is the end of the letter

و من هذا الكتاب، و هو آخره :

Get away from me, O world. Your rein is on your own shoulders as I have released myself from your claws, removed myself of your snares and avoided walking into your slippery places. Where are those whom you have deceived by your jokes? Where are those communities whom you have enticed with your embellishments? They are all confined to graves and hidden in burial places.

By Allah, if you had been a visible personality aud a body capable of feeling, I would have awarded you the penalties fixed by Allah because of the people whom you received through desires and the communities whom you threw into destruction and the rulers whom you consigned to ruin and drove to places of distress after which there is neither going nor returning. Indeed whoever stepped on your slippery place slipped, whoever rode your waves was drowned, and whoever evaded your snares received inward support. He who keeps himself safe from you does not worry even though his affairs may be straitened and the world to him is like a day which is near expiring.

إِلَيْكَ عَنِّي يَا دُنْيَا، فَحَبْلُكِ عَلَى غَارِبِكِ، قَدِ انْسَلَلْتُ مِنْ مَخَالِبِكِ، وَأَفْلَتُّ مِنْ حَبَائِلِكِ، وَاجْتَنَبْتُ الذَّهَابَ فِي مَدَاحِضِكِ. أَيْنَ الْقُرُونُ الَّذِينَ غَرَرْتِهِمْ بَمَدَاعِبِكَ؟! أَيْنَ الاْمَمُ الَّذِينَ فَتَنْتِهِمْ بِزَخَارِفِكِ؟! هَاهُمْ رَهَائِنُ الْقُبُورِ، وَمَضَامِينُ اللُّحُودِ. وَاللهِ لَوْ كُنْتِ شَخْصاً مَرْئِيّاً، وَقَالَباً حِسِّيّاً، لاَقَمْتُ عَلَيْكِ حُدُودَ اللهِ فِي عِبَاد غَرَرْتِهِمْ بِالاْمَانِي، وَأُمَم أَلْقَيْتِهِمْ فِي الْمَهَاوِي، وَمُلُوك أَسْلَمْتِهِمْ إِلَى التَّلَفِ، وَأَوْرَدْتِهِمْ مَوَارِدَ الْبَلاَءِ، إِذْ لاَ وِرْدَ وَلاَ صَدَرَ! هَيْهَاتَ! مَنْ وَطِىءَ دَحْضَكِ زَلِقَ، وَمَنْ رَكِبَ لُجَجَكِ غَرِقَ، وَمَنِ ازْوَرَّ عَنْ حَبَائِلِكِ وُفِّقَ، وَالسَّالِمُ مِنْكِ لاَيُبَالِي إِنْ ضَاقَ بِهِ مُنَاخُهُ وَالدُّنْيَا عِنْدَهُ كَيَوْم حَانَ انْسِلاَخُهُ

Get away from me, for, by Allah, I do not bow before you so that you may humiliate me, nor do I let loose the reins for you so that you may drive me away. I swear by Allah an oath wherein I, except for the will of Allah, shall so train my self that it will feel joyful if it gets one loaf for eating, and be content with only salt to season it. I shall let my eyes empty themselves of tears like the stream whose water has flown away. Should `Ali eat whatever he has and fall asleep like the cattle who fill their stomachs from the pasture land and lie down, or as the goats (who) graze, eat the green grass and go into their pen! His eyes may die if he, after long years, follows loose cattle and pasturing animals.

اعْزُبِي عَنِّي! فَوَاللهِ لاَ أَذِلُّ لَكِ فَتَسْتَذِلِّينِي، وَلاَ أَسْلَسُ لَكِ فَتَقُودِينِي. وَايْمُ اللهِ ـ يَمِيناً أسْتَثْنِي فِيهَا بِمَشِيئَةِ اللهِ عَزَّوَجَلّ ـ لاَرُوضَنَّ نَفْسِي رِيَاضَةً تَهشُّ مَعَها إِلَى الْقُرْصِ إِذَا قَدَرتْ عَلَيْهِ مَطْعُوماً، وَتَقْنَعُ بِالْمِلْحِ مَأْدُوماً; وَلاَدَعَنَّ مُقْلَتِي كَعَيْنِ مَاء، نَضَبَ مَعِينُهَا مُسْتَفْرِغَةً دُمُوعَهَا. أَتَمْتَلِىءُ السَّائِمَةُ مِنْ رِعْيِهَا فَتَبْرُكَ؟ وَتَشْبَعُ الرَّبِيضَةُ مِنْ عُشْبِهَا فَتَرْبِضَ؟ وَيَأْكُلُ عَلِيٌّ مِنْ زَادِهِ فَيَهْجَعَ؟ قَرَّتْ إِذاً عَيْنُهُ إِذَا اقْتَدَى بَعْدَ السِّنِينَ الْمُتَطَاوِلَةِ بِالْبَهِيمَةِ الْهَامِلَةِ، وَالسَّائِمَةِ الْمَرْعِيَّةِ !

Blessed is he who discharges his obligations towards Allah and endures his hardships, allows himself no sleep in the night but when sleep overpowers him lies down on the ground using his hand as a pillow, along with those who keep their eyes wakeful in fear of the Day of Judgement, whose bodies are ever awav from beds, whose lips are humming in remembrance of Allah and whose sins have been erased through their prolonged beseechings for forgiveness.

They are the party of Allah; be it known, verily the party of Allah alone shall be the successful ones (Qur'an, 58:22).

Therefore, O, Ibn Hunayf, fear Allah and be content with your own loaves so that you may escape Hell.

طُوبَى لِنَفْس أَدَّتْ إِلَى رَبِّهَا فَرْضَهَا، وَعَرَكَتْ بِجَنْبِهَا بُؤْسَهَا، وَهَجَرَتْ فِي اللَّيْلِ غُمْضَهَا، حَتَّى إِذَا غَلَبَ الْكَرَى عَلَيْهَا افْتَرَشَتْ أَرْضَهَا، وَتَوَسَّدَتْ كَفَّهَا، فِي مَعْشَر أَسْهَرَ عُيُونَهُمْ خَوْفُ مَعَادِهِمْ، تَجَافَتْ عَنْ مَضَاجِعِهِمْ جُنُوبُهُمْ، وَهَمْهَمَتْ بِذِكْرِ رَبِّهِم شِفَاهُهُمْ، وَتَقَشَّعَتْ بِطُولِ اسْتِغْفَارِهِم ذُنُوبُهُمْ. ( أُولئِكَ حِزْبُ الله، أَلاَ إِنَّ حِزْبَ اللهِ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ)

فَاتَّقِ اللهَ يَابْنَ حُنَيْف، وَلْتَكْفُفْ أَقْرَاصُكَ، لِيَكُونَ مِنْ النَّارِ خَلاَصُكَ

Notes

1. Fadak was a green fertile village near Medina in the Hijaz and it also had a fortress called ash-Shumrukh. (Mu `jam al-buldan, vol.4, p.238; Mu`jam masta`jam, al-Bakri, vol.3, p.l015; ar-Rawd al-mi`tar, al-Himyari, p.437; Wafa' al-wafa, vol.4, p. 1280). Fadak belonged to the Jews and in the year 7 A. H. its ownership went from them to the Prophet under the terms of a settlement for peace. The reason for this settlement was that when after the fall of Khaybar the Jews realized the real power of the Muslims, their martial aspirations were lowered, and noting that the Prophet had spared some Jews on their seeking protection, they also sent a message of peace to the Prophet and expressed their wish that Fadak might be taken from them and their area should not be made a battlefield. Consequently, the Prophet accepted their request and allowed them an amnesty, and this land became his personal property wherein no one else had any interest, nor could there be any such interest; because the Muslims have a share only in those properties which they might have acquired as booty after jihad, while the property acquired without jihad is called fay' and the Prophet alone is entitled to it. No other person has a share in it. Thus, Allah says:

And whatever hath Allah bestowed on His Apostle from them, ye pricked not against it any horse or a camel, but Allah granteth authority unto His apostles against whomsoever He willeth: And Allah over all things is All-powerful. (Qur'an, 59:6)

No one has ever disputed the fact that Fadak was secured without battle. It was therefore the Prophet's personal property to which no one else had any title. The Historians write:

Fadak was personal to the Prophet as the Muslims did not use their horses or camels for it. (at-Tarikh, at-Tabari, vol.1, pp.1582-1583, 1589; al-Kamil, Ibn al-Athir, vol.2, pp.224-225;as-Sirah, Ibn Hisham, vol.3, p.368; at-Tarikh, Ibn Khaldum, vol.2, part 2, p.40; Tarikh al-khamis, ad-Diyar'bakri, vol.2, p.58; as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, vol.3, p.50)

The historian and geographical scholar Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri (d. 279/892) writes:

Fadak was the personal property of the Prophet as the Muslims had not used their horses or camels for it. (Futuh al-buldan, vol.1, p.33)

`Umar ibn al-Khattab had himself regarded Fadak as the unshared property of the Holy Prophet when he declared:

The property of Banu an-Nadir was among that which Allah has bestowed on His Messenger; against them neither horses nor camels were pricked but they belonged to the Messenger of Allah especially. (as-Sahih, al-Bukhari, vol.4, p.46; vol.7, p.82; vol.9, pp.121-122; as-Sahih, Muslim, vol.5, p.151; as-Sunan, Abu Dawud, vol.3, pp. 139-141; as-Sunan, an-Nasa'i, vol.7, p.132; al-Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.1, pp.25.48.60,208: as-Sunan al-kubra, al-Bayhayqi, vol.6, pp.296-299)

It is also proved in the accepted way that the Prophet had in his lifetime given this land (Fadak) to Fatimah as a gift. It is narrated through al-Bazzar, Abu Ya`la, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Marduwayh and others from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri and through Ibn Marduwayh from `Abdullah ibn al-`Abbas that when the verse:

"And give to the near of kin his due. ." (Qur'an, 17:26) was revealed, the Holy Prophet called Fatimah' and gifted Fadak to her. (ad-Durr al-manthur, as-Suyuti, vol.4, p.177; Majma` az-zawa'id, al-Haythami, vol.7, p.46; Kanz al-'ummal, al-Muttaqi, vol.3, p.439; Ruh al-ma`ani, al-Alusi, vol.15, p.62)

When Abu Bakr assumed power then in view of some benefits of State he turned out Fatimah from Fadak and took it from her possession. Thus, the historians write:

Certainly, Abu Bakr snatched Fadak from Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) (Sharh Nahjul Balaghah al-balaghah, Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.16, p. 219; Wafa' al-wafa, as-Samhudi, vol.3, p.1OOO; as-Sawa`iq al-muhriqah, Ibn Hajar, p.32)

Fatimah raised a voice against it. Protesting to Abu Bakr, she said, "You have taken over possession of Fadak although the Prophet had gifted it to me during his lifetime." On this Abu Bakr asked her to produce witness of the gift. Consequently, Amir al-mu'minin and Umm Ayman gave evidence in her favour. (Umm Ayman was the freed bond maid and the dry nurse of the Holy Prophet. She was the mother of Usamah ibn Zayd ibn al-Harithah. The Holy Prophet used to say "Umm Ayman is my mother after my mother. [al-Mustadrak, vol.4, p.63; at-Tabari, vol.3, p. 3460; al-Isti`ab. vol.4, p. 1793; Usd al-ghabah, vol.5, p.567] The Holy Prophet bore witness that she is among the people of Paradise. [Ibn Sa`d, vol.8, p.192; al-Isabah, vol.4, p.432]). But this evidence was held inadmissible by Abu Bakr and Fatimah's claim was rejected as being based on false statement. About this al-Baladhuri writes:

Fatimah said to Abu Bakr, "The Messenger of Allah had apportioned Fadak to me. Therefore, give it to me." Then he asked her for another witness than Umm Ayman, saying, "O' daughter of the Prophet, you know that evidence is not admissible except by two men or one man and two women."

After these facts there remains no possibility of denying that Fadak was the personal property of the Prophet and that he had completed its gifting to her by handing over possession in his lifetime. But Abu Bakr took over its possession and dislodged her from it. In this connection, he rejected the evidence of `Ali and Umm Ayman on the ground that the requirement of evidence was not completed by the evidence of one man and one woman. Besides them, Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn gave evidence in support of Fatimah, but their evidence was rejected too on the ground that the evidence of the offspring and minors was not acceptable in favour of their parents. Then Rabah, the slave of the Holy Prophet was also produced as a witness in support of the claim of Fatimah but he was rejected too. (Futuh al-buldan, al-Baladhuri, vol. 1, p.35: at-Tarikh, al-Ya`qubi, vol.3, p.195; Muruj adh-dhahab, al-Mas`udi, vol.3, p.237; al-Awa'il, Abu Hilal al-`Askari, p.209; Wafa' al-wafa, vol.3, pp.999, 1000-1001; Mu`jam al-buldan, Yaqut al-Hamawi, vol.4, p.239; Sharh, Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.16, pp.216, 219 - 220,274; al-Muhalla, Ibn Hazm, vol.6, p.507; as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, vol.3, p.361 ; at-Tafsir, al-Fakhr ar-Razi, vol.29, p.284).

At this stage the question arises that when Fatimah's possession over Fadak is admitted as Amir al-mu 'minin has also clarified in this letter by saying, "We had Fadak in our possession," what was the sense in asking Fatimah to produce evidence in support of her claim, because the onus of proof does not lie on the person in possession. The onus of proof lies on the person filing a counter claim because possession itself constitutes a proof.

As such it was on Abu Bakr to produce a proof of the lawfulness of his taking over the land, and in the case of his being unable to do so Fatimah's possession would mean a proof for her lawful ownership. As such it would be wrong to ask her to produce some more proof or evidence.

It is strange that when other claims of this nature came before Abu Bakr he allowed them in favour of the claimant merely on the basis of the claim, and the claimant is neither asked to furnish proof of his claim nor to produce witnesses. In this connection, the traditionalists write:

It is related from Jabir ibn `Abdillah al-Ansari that he said that the Messenger of Allah had said that when the booty from Bahrain arrived he would allow him such and such out of it, but the booty did not arrive till the Prophet's death. When it arrived in the days of Abu Bakr he went to him and Abu Bakr made the announcement that whoever had a claim against the Messenger of Allah or to whomever he had made a promise should come for his claim. So I went to him and told him that the Prophet had promised to give me such and such property out of the booty from Bahrain whereupon he gave me all that. (as-Sahih, al-Bukhari, vol.3, pp.119,209,236; vol.4, p.110; vol.5, p.218; as- Sahih, Muslim, vol.7, pp.75-76; al-Jami' as-sahih, at-Tirmidhi, vol.5, p.129; al-Musnad, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.3, pp.307-308; at-Tabaqat al-kabir, Ibn Sa'd, vol.2, part 2, pp.88-89).

In the annotations of this tradition, Shihabu'd-Din Ahmad ibn `Ali (Ibn Hajar) al-`Asqalani ash-Shafi`i (773/1372 - 852/1449) and Badru'd- Din Mabmud ibn Ahmad al-`Ayni al-Hanafi (762/1361 - 855/1451) have written:

This tradition leads to the conclusion that the evidence of one just companion can also be admitted as full evidence even though it may be in his own favour, because Abu Bakr did not ask jabir to produce any witness in proof of his claim. (Fath al-bari fi sharh sahih al-Bukhari, vol.5, p.380; `Umdatu'l-qari fi sharh sahih al-Bukhari, vol.12, p.121)

If it was lawful to allow property to Jabir on the basis of good impression without calling for witness or evidence then what stopped allowing Fatimah's claim on the basis of similar good impression. If good impression could exist in the case of Jabir to such an effect that he would not benefit by speaking a lie, then why should there not be the good belief about Fatimah that she would not attribute a false saying to the Prophet just for a piece of land. Firstly, her admitted truthfulness and honesty was enough for holding her truthful in her claim and the evidence of `Ali and Umm Ayman in her favour was also available besides other evidences. It has been said that the claim could not be decided in favour of Fatimah on the basis of these two witnesses because the holy Qur'an lays down the principle of evidence that:

. .then call to witness two witnesses from among your men and if there not be two men, then (take) a man and two women, (Qur'an, 2:282)

If this principle is universal and general then it should be taken into regard on every occasion, but on some occasions it is found not to have been followed; for example, when an Arab had a dispute with the Prophet about a camel, Khuzaymah ibn Thabit al-Ansari gave evidence in favour of the Prophet and this one evidence was deemed to be equal to two, because there was no doubt in the honesty and truthfulness of the individual in whose favour the evidence was led. It was for this reason that the Holy Prophet granted him the title of Dhu'sh-Shahadatayn (i.e., one whose evidence is equivalent to the evidence of two witnesses). (al-Bukhari, vol.4, p.24; vol.6, p.146; Abu Dawud, vol.3, p.308; an-Nasa'i, vol.7, p.302; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.5, pp.188, 189,216; al-Isti`ab, vol.2, p.448; Usd al-ghabah, vol.2, p.114; al-Isabah,vol.1, pp.425 -426; al-Musannaf, as-San`ani, vol.8, pp.366 - 368).

Consequently, neither was the generality of the verse about evidence affected by this action nor was it deemed to be against the cannons of evidence. So, if here in view of the Prophet's truthfulness one evidence in his favour was deemed to be equal to two, then could not the evidence of `Ali and Umm Ayman be regarded enough for Fatimah in view of her moral greatness and truthfulness? Besides, this verse does not show that there can be no other way of establishing a claim other than these two ways. In this connection, al-Qadi Nuru'llah al-Mar'ashi at-Tustari (956/1549 - 1019/ 1610) has written in Ihqaq al-haqq, chapter on al-Mata`in:

The view of the objector that by Umm Ayman's evidence the requirement of evidence remains incomplete is wrong, on the grounds that from certain traditions it is seen that it is lawful to give a decision on the basis of one witness and it does not necessarily mean that the injunction of the Qur'an has been violated, because this verse means that a decision can be given on the strength of the evidence of two men or one man and two women, and that their evidence is enough. From this it does not appear that if there are some other grounds besides evidence of witnesses that are unacceptable, and that verdict cannot be given on its basis, unless it is argued that this is the only sense of the verse. But since every sense is not final argument, this sense can be brushed aside, particularly because the tradition clearly points to a contrary sense, and ignoring the sense does not necessarily mean violation of the verse. Secondly, the verse allows a choice between the evidence of two men or of one man and two women. If by virtue of the tradition a third choice is added namely that a verdict can be passed by means of other evidence as well, then how does it necessitate that the Qur'anic verse should stand violated?

In any case, from this reply it is clear that a claimant is not obliged to produce the evidence of two men or one man and two women in support of the claim because if there is one witness and the claimant swears on oath, then he can be taken to have legitimacy in his claim and a decision can be given in his favour. In this connection, it has been narrated by more than twelve companions of the Holy Prophet that:

The Messenger of Allah used to decide cases on the strength of one witness and the taking of oath.

It has been explained by some companions (of the Prophet) and some scholars ofjurisprudence that this decision is specially related to rights, property and transactions and this decesion was practised by the three Caliphs, Abu Bakr, `Umar and `Uthman. (Muslim, vol.5, p.128; Abu Dawud, vol.3, pp.308-309; at-Tirmidhi, vol.3, pp.627-629; Ibn Majah, vol.2, p.793; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.1, pp.248,315,323, vol.3, p.305; vol.5, p.285; Malik ibn Anas, al-Muwatta', vol.2, pp.721-725; al-Bayhaqi, as-Sunan al-kubra, vol.10, pp.167 - 176;as-Sunan, ad-Dar'qutni, vol.4, pp.212 - 215; Majma` az-zawa'id, vol.4, p.202; Kanz al-'ummal, vol.7, p.13)

When decisions were passed on the strength of one witness and swearing, then even if in Abu Bakr's view the requirement of evidence was incomplete, he should have asked her to swear and given the judgement in her favour. But here the very object was to tarnish the truthfulness of Fatimah so that in future the question of her testimony should not arise.

However, when Fatimah's claim was rejected in this manner and Fadak was not accepted as the Prophet's gift to her, she claimed it on the basis of inheritance saying:

"If you do not agree that the Prophet had gifted it to me, you cannot at least deny that Fadak and the revenues of Khaybar as well as the lands around Medina were the Prophet's personal properties, and I am his only successor." But she was deprived of her inheritance on the basis of a tradition related by Abu Bakr himself that the Holy Prophet said: “We prophets have no successors and whatever we leave behind constitutes charity." (al-Bukhari, vol.4, p. 96; vol.5, pp.25 - 26,115,117; vol.8, p.185; Muslim, vol.5, pp.153-l55; at-Tirmidhi, vol.4, pp.157-158; Abu Dawud, vol.3, pp.l42-143; an-Nasa'i, vol.7, p.l32; Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.1, pp.4,6,9,lO; al-Bayhaqi, vol.6, p.300; lbn Sa'd, vol.2, part2, pp.86-87; at-Tabari, vol.1, p.1825; Tarikh al-khamis, vol.2, pp.173-174).

Besides Abu Bakr no one else had knowledge of this saying which was shown to be a tradition of the Prophet nor had anyone from among the companions heard it. Thus, Jalalu'd-Din `Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr as-Suyuti ash-Shafi`i (849/1445-911/1505) and Shihabu'd-Din Ahmad ibn Muhammad (Ibn Hajar) al-Haytami ash-Shafi'i (909/1504-974/ 1567) have written:

After the death of the Prophet there was a difference of view about the inheritance and no one had any information in this matter. Then, Abu Bakr said that he had heard the Messenger of Allah saying that: "We prophets leave no successors and whatever we leave behind constitutes charity". (Tarikh al-khulafa', p.73; as Sawa'iq al-muhriqah, p. 19)

The mind refuses to believe that the Prophet should not tell those individuals who could be deemed his successors that they would not inherit, and inform a third party who had not the remotest kinship that there would be no successor to him. Then this story was made public only when the case for Fadak had been filed in his court and he himself constituted the contesting party. In such circumstances how can his presenting in his own support a tradition which no one else had heard be deemed permissible. If it is argued that this tradition should be relied upon in view of the greatness of position of Ahu Bakr, then why cannot Fatimah's claim to the gift be relied upon because of her honesty and truthfulness, more so when the evidence of Amir al-mu'minin and Umm Ayman as well as others was also in her favour. If necessity was felt to call more evidence in her case, then evidence can also be called for about this tradition, particularly, since this tradition hits against the general instructions of the Qur'an on succession. How can a tradition which is weak in the manner of its relating and altered and is questioned on the basis of facts be deemed to particularize a generality of the Qur'anic injunction on succession, because the question of the inheritance of the prophets is clearly mentioned in the Qur'an. Thus, Allah says:

And Solomon inherited David . (Qur'an, 27:16)

At another place it is stated through the words of Prophet Zakariyya:

So grant me from yourself an heir, who shall inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. . (Qur'an, 19:5-6)

In these verses succession refers to succession in estate and to take it in its figurative meaning of succession in prophetic knowledge would not only be obtuse but also against facts, because knowledge and prophethood are not objects of succession, nor do they possess the quality of transmission through inheritance, for in that case all the progeny of the prophets would have been prophets. There is no sense in making a distinction that the progeny of some prophets may inherit prophethood while others should remain deprived of it. It is strange that the theory of transmission of prophethood through inheritance is propagated by those who have always laid the objection against the Shi'ahs that they regard the Imamate and the caliphate as an object of inheritance and confined to one family only. Will not prophethood become an object of inheritance by taking succession in this verse to mean succession to the prophethood?

If in Abu Bakr's view by virtue of this tradition there could be no successor of the Prophet then where was this tradition when a document had been written admitting Fatimah's claim for succession? Thus, Nuru'd- Din `Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Halabi ash-Shafi'i (975/1567 - 1044/1635) quoting from Shamsu'd-Din Yusuf (Sibt ibn al-Jawzi) al-Hanafi (581/1185 - 654/ 1256) narrated:

Abu Bakr was on the pulpit when Fatimah came to him and said, "O' Abu Bakr, the Qur'an should allow your daughter to inherit you but I am not to inherit my father!" Abu Bakr started weeping and alighted from the pulpit. Then he wrote for her about Fadak. At that time `Umar arrived and enquired what it was. Abu Bakr replied, "It is a document I have written for Fatimah about her inheritance from her father." `Umar said, "What will you spend on the Muslims while the Arabs are waging war against you, as you see?" Then, `Umar took the document and tore it. (as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, vol.3, pp. 361-362)

Every sensible person who remarks this behaviour can easily reach the conclusion that this tradition is concocted and wrong, and was fabricated only to secure possession over Fadak and other inheritances. Consequently, Fatimah refused to accept it and expressed her anger in this way that she made a will about Abu Bakr and `Umar that the two should not join in her funeral prayer. `A'ishah narrated:

Fatimah (p.b.u.h.), the daughter of the Holy Prophet (S) sent for Abu Bakr (after he became Caliph after the death of the Holy Prophet) claiming from him her inheritance left by the Messenger of Allah from what Allah had bestowed (especially) upon him at Medina and Fadak and what was left from one-fifth (khums) of the income (annually received) from Khaybar. ., Abu Bakr refused to hand over anything from it to Fatimah. Then, Fatimah became angry with Abu Bakr and forsook him and did not talk to him until the end of her life...When she died, her husband, `Ali ibn Abi Talib buried her at night. He did not inform Abu Bakr about her death and offered the funeral prayer over her himself. . (al-Bukhari, vol.5, p.177; vol.8; p.185; Muslim, vol.5, pp.153-155; al-Bayhari, vol.4, p.29; vol.6, pp. 300-301; Ibn Sa'd, vol.2, part 2, p.86; Ahmad ibn Hanbal ,vol.1,p.9; at-Tabari, vol.1, p.1825; Ibn Kathir, at-Tarikh, vol.5, pp.285-286; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.6, p.46 and Wafa' al-wafa', vol.3, p.995)

In this connection, Umm Ja'far, the daughter of Muhammad ibn Ja`far, narrated about the request of Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) to Asma' bint `Umays near her death that:

When I die, I want you and `Ali to wash me, and do not allow anyone to go in to me (in my house).

When she died `A'ishah came to enter, Asma' told her, "Do not enter." `A'ishah complained to Abu Bakr (her father) saying,"This Khath`amiyyah (a woman from the tribe of Kath'am, i.e. Asma') intervenes between us and the daughter of the Messenger of Allah . ." Then, Abu Bakr came and stood at the door and said, "O' Asma', what makes you prevent the wives of the Prophet from entering in to the daughter of the Messenger of Allah?" Asma' replied, "She had herself ordered me not to allow anyone to enter into her . ." Abu Bakr said, "Do what she has ordered you." (Hilyah al-awliya', vol.2, p.43; as-Sunan al-kubra, vol.3, p.396; vol.4, p.334; Ansab al-ashraf, vol.1, p.405; al-Isti`ab, vol.4, pp.1897-1898; Usd al-ghabah, vol.5, p.524; al-Isabah, vol.4, pp.378-379)

Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) had also made a request to Amir al-mu'minin `Ali that she must be buried at night and that no one should come to her, that Abu Bakr and `Umar should not be notified about her death and burial, and that Abu Bakr should not be allowed to say the prayer over her body.

When she died, `Ali washed and buried her in the quietness of the night, not notifying Abu Bakr and `Umar. So, these two were not aware of her burial.

Muhammad ibn `Umar al-Waqidi (130/747 - 207/823) said:

It has been proved to us that `Ali (p.b.u.h.) performed her funeral prayer and buried her by night, accompanied by al-`Abbas (ibn `Abd al-Muttalib) and (his son) al-Fadl, and did not notify anyone.

it was for this reason that the burial place of Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) was hidden and unknown, and no one is sure about it. (al-Mustadrak, vol.3, pp.162-163; al-Musannaf, vol.4, p.141; Ansab al-ashraf, vol.1, pp.402, 405. al-Isti`ab, vol.4, p.1898; Usd al-ghabah, vol.5, pp. 524-525: al-Isabah, vol.4, pp.379-380; at-Tabari, vol.3, pp.2435-2436; Ibn Sa`d, vol.8, pp.19-20; Wafa' al-wafa, vol.3, pp.901-902,904,905; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.16, pp.279-281) To attribute this displeasure of Fatimah to sentiments and thereby to lower its importance does not evince a correct sentiment, because if this displeasure had been the result of sentiments then Amir al-mu'minin would have stopped her from this misplaced displeasure, but no history shows that Amir al-mu'minin took this displeasure to be misplaced. Besides, how could her displeasure be the result of personal feelings or sentiments since her pleasure or displeasure always accord with Allah's will. The Prophet's following saying is a proof of this:

O' Fatimah, surely Allah is enraged in your rage and is pleased in your pleasure. (al-Mustadrak, vol.3, p.153; Usd al-ghabah, vol.5, p.522; al-Isabah, vol.4, p.366; Tahdhib at-tahdhib, vol.12, p.441; al-Khasa'is al-kubra, vol.2, p.265; Kanz al-`ummal, vol.13, p.96; vol.16, p.280; Majma` az-zawa'id, vol.9, p.203)

A short history of Fadak after the death of Fatimah

The motive which causes us to pursue the history of Fadak and to extract the continuation of events after it for a period of three centuries from the texts of historical books is to clarify three questions:-

a. The rule of annulment of inheritance from prophets made by the Holy Prophet, in other words, that the property of the Holy Prophet is a part of the public treasury and belongs to all Muslims. This was claimed by the first caliph Abu Bakr, and was rejected by his successors, both by next the two caliphs (Umar and Uthman) and by the Umayyads and the `Abbassids. We must consider that the lawfulness and rightfulness of their caliphate depended upon the correctness and lawfulness of the caliphate of the first Caliph and his actions.

b. Amir al-mu'minin (`Ali p.b.u.h.) and the descendants of Fatimah never had any hesitation regarding the rightfulness and justifiability of their claim. They insisted and confirmed that Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) had always been right and that Abu Bakr's claim had always been rejected, and they did not yield to the false claim.

c. Whenever one of the Caliphs made a decision to put into effect Allah's command, in regard to Fadak, to observe justice and equity, and to restore the right to the entitled one in conformity with Islamic rules, he used to return back the Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) and to hand it over to them.

Notes

1. `Umar ibn al-Khattab was the most harsh person in keeping Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) from Fadak and her inheritance as he himself confessed:

When the Messenger of Allah died I came along with Abu Bakr to `Ali ibn Abi Talib and said, "What do you say about what has been left by the Messenger of Allah? "He replied, "We have the most rights with the Holy Prophet." I (`Umar) said, "Even those properties of Khaybar?" He said, "Yes, even those of Khaybar." I said, "Even those of Fadak?" He replied, "Yes, even those of Fadak." Then, I said, "By Allah, we say no, even if you cut our necks with saws." (Majma` az-zawa'id, vol.9, pp.39-40)

As it has been mentioned before, `Umar then took the document of Fadak and tore it up. But when `Umar became Caliph (13/634 - 23/644) he gave back the Fadak to inheritors of the Holy Prophet. Yaqut al-Hamawi (574/1178 - 626/1229), the famous historian and geographer, following the event of Fadak said:

...Then, when `Umar ibn al-Khattab became caliph and gained victories and the Muslims had secured abundant wealth (i.e. the public treasury satisfied the Caliphate's needs) he made his judgement contrary to that of his predecessor, and that was to give it (Fadak) back to the Prophet's heirs. At that time `Ali ibn Abi Talib and `Abbas ibn `Abd al-Muttalib disputed Fadak.

`Ali said that Holy Prophet (S) had bestowed it on Fatimah during his lifetime. `Abbas denied this and used to say, "This was in the possession of the Holy Prophet (S) and I am sharing with his heirs." They were disputing this* among each other and asked `Umar to settle the case. He refused to judge between them and said, "Both of you are more conscious and aware to your problem; but I only give it to you..." (Mu`jam al-buldan, vol.4, pp.238-239: Wafa' al-wafa, vol.3, p.999; Tahdhib aL-lughah, vol.1O, p.124; Lisan al-`Arab,vol.10, p.473; Taj al-`arus, vol.7, p.166)

The reason that `Umar and Abu Bakr were trying to seize Fadak was an economic and political reason, not merely a religious one as the previous episode shows, for when the economic and political condition of the caliphate improved, and there was no need of the income obtained from Fadak, `Umar's judgement changed also.

The last part of this historic event has been inserted afterwards to demonstrate the matter of inheritance by the brother of the deceased or the paternal uncle of the deceased when he has no sons. This problem is a matter of dispute between Islamic sects. The judicial and jurisprudencial discussion is separate from our goal. We are only discussing the matter historically.

`Abbas had no claim in this case because he had not shown that he had a share in this property nor did his descendants consider it to be among their own assests even when they had became caliphs and were reigning. They owned this estate either in their position as caliphs, or they used to return it to the descendants of Fatimah when they had decided to be just governors.2. When `Uthman ibn Affan became caliph after the death of `Umar (23/644 - 35/656) he granted Fadak to Marwan ibn al-Hakam, his cousin (as-Sunan al-kubra, vol.6, p.3O1; Wafa' al-wafa, vol.3, p. 1000; Ibn Abi'l- Hadid, vol.1, p.198), and this was one of the causes of vindictive feelings among the Muslims towards `Uthman (al-Ma `arif, Ibn Qutaybah, p. 195; al-`Iqd al-farid, vol.4, pp.283, 435; at-Tarikh, Abu'l-Fida', vol.1, p.168; at-Tarikh, Ibn al-Wardi, vol.1, p.204) which ended in the revolt against him and his murder. "While previously Fatimah used to claim it. sometimes as her inheritance and sometimes as a gift (from her father), she was driven away from it (Fadak)" as Ibn Abi'l-Hadid said. (Sharh Nahjul Balaghah al-balaghah). In this way Fadak fell into the possession of Marwan. He used to sell its crops and products for at least ten thousand Dinars per year, and if in some years its income decreased this drop was not very pronounced. This was its usual profit until the time of the caliphate of `Umar ibn `Abd al- `Aziz (in 100/718). (Ibn Sa`d. vol.5, pp.286, 287; Subh al-a`sha, vol.4, p.291)

3. When Mu`awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan became caliph (41/661 - 60/ 680) he became a partner with Marwan and others in Fadak. He alloted one third to Marwan and one third to `Amr ibn `Uthman ibn `Affan and one third to his son Yazid. This was after the death of al-Hasan ibn `Ali (p.b. u.h.). "To make angry the progeny of the Holy Prophet" al-Ya`qubi states: (at-Tarikh, vol.2, p.199)

It was in the possession of the three above mentioned persons until Marwan became caliph (64/684 - 65/685) and he completely took over possession of it. Then he donated it to his two sons, `Abd al-Malik and `Abd al-'Aziz. Then `Abd al-`Aziz donated his share to his son (`Umar ibn `Abd al.`Aziz).

4. When `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz became caliph (99/717 - 101/ 720) he delivered a lecture and mentioned that: "Verily, Fadak was among the things that Allah had bestowed on His Messenger, and no horse, nor camel was pricked against it..." and mentioned the case of Fadak during the past caliphates until He said: "Then Marwan gave it (Fadak) to my father and to `Abd al-Malik. It became mine and al-Walid's and Sulayman's (two sons of `Abd al-Malik). When al-Walid became caliph (86/705 - 96/715)I asked him for his share and He gave it to me. I asked also for Sulayman's share and he gave it to me. Then I gathered the three parts and I possess no property more preferable to me than this. Be witness that I returned it to its original state." He wrote this to his governor of Medina (Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn `Amr ibn Hazm) and ordered him to carry out what he had declared in the speech he delivered. Then Fadak came into the possession of the children of Fatimah. "This was the first removal of oppression by returning it (Fadak) to the children of `Ali." (al-Awa'il, Abu Hilal al-`Askari, p.209). They possessed it during the reign of this caliph.

5. When Yazid ibn `Abd al-Malik became caliph (101/720 - 105/ 724) he seized Fadak and they (the children of `Ali) were dispossessed. It fell into the possession of the Banu Marwan as it had been previously. They passed it from hand to hand until their caliphate expired and passed away to the Banu al-Abbas.

6. When Abu'l-`Abbas Abdullah as-Saffah became the first caliph of the `Abbasid dynasty (132/749-136/754) he gave back Fadak to the children of Fatimah and submitted it to`Abdullah ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Hasan ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib.

7. When Abu Ja`far `Abdullah al-Mansur ad-Dawanaqi (136/754 - 158/775) became caliph, he seized Fadak from the children of al-Hasan.

8. When Muhammad al-Mahdi ibn al-Mansur became caliph (158/775 - 169/785) he returned Fadak to the children of Fatimah.

9. Then Musa al-Hadi ibn al-Mahdi (169/785 - 170/786) and his brother Harun ar-Rashid (170/786 - 193/809) seized it from the descendants of Fatimah and it was in the possession of Banu al-`Abbas until the time that al-Ma'mun became caliph (198/813 - 218/833).

10. al-Ma'mun al-`Abbasi gave it back to the descendants of Fatimah (210/826). It is narrated through al-Mahdi ibn Sabiq that:

Al-Ma’mun one day sat to hear the complaints of the people and to judge in cases. The first utter of complaint which he received caused him to weep when he looked at it. He asked where the attorney of Fatimah daughter of the Holy Prophet was? An old man stood up and came forth, arguing with him about Fadak and al-Ma'mun also argued with him until he overcame al-Ma'mun. (al-Awa'il, p.209)

Al-Ma’mun summoned the Islamic jurisprudents (al-Fuqaha') and interrogated them about the claim of the Banu Fatimah. They narrated to al-Ma'mun that the Holy Prophet gifted Fadak to Fatimah and that after the death of the Holy Prophet, Fatimah demanded Abu Bakr to return Fadak to her. He asked her to bring witnesses to her claim regarding this gift. She brought `Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Umm Ayman as her witnesses. They witnessed the case in her favour. Abu Bakr rejected their witness. Then al-Ma'mun asked the Islamic jurisprudents: "What is your view about Umm Ayman?" They replied, "She is a woman to whom the Holy Prophet bore witness that she is an inhabitant of Paradise." al-Ma'mun disputed at length with them and forced them to accept the argument by proofs till they confessed that `Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Umm Ayman had witnessed only the truth. When they unanimously accepted this matter, he restored Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah. (at-Tarikh, al-Ya`qubi, vol.3, pp. 195 - 196)

Then al-Ma'mun ordered that the estate (of Fadak) should be registered among the property (of the descendants of Fatimah) and it was registered and al-Ma'mun signed it.

Then he wrote a letter to his governor in Medina named Qutham ibn Ja`far as follows:

"Know that Amir al-mu'minin, in exercise of the authority vested upon him by the divine religion as the Caliph, successor and the kinsman of the Holy Prophet has considered himself more deserving to follow the precedent of the Holy Prophet (sunnatu'n-nabi) and to carry out his commands. And (the chief is more entitled) to restore to the rightful persons any endowment gifted by the Holy Prophet or thing which the Holy Prophet had gifted to someone. The success and safeguard of Amir al-mu'minin is by Allah and he is particularly anxious to act in a way which will win the pleasure of the Almighty Allah for him.

"Verily, the Holy Prophet had gifted the estate of Fadak to his daughter Fatimah (p.b.u.h.). He had transferred its ownership to her. It is a clear and established fact. None of the kindred of the Holy Prophet have any difference of view. Fatimah always claimed that which was more deserving (to be justified) than the person (Abu Bakr) whose word was accepted. Amir al-mu'minin considers it right and proper to restore Fadak to the heirs of Fatimah. He would hereby win nearness to Almighty Allah by establishing His justice and right. It would win the appreciation of the Holy Prophet by carrying into effect his commandments. Amir al-mu'minin has commanded that this restoration of Fadak should duly be registered. The commands should he transmitted to all the officials.

"Then, if, as it was, a custom to proclaim on every hajj gathering (every year), following the death of the Holy Prophet, that anyone to whom the Holy Prophet had promised (the donation) of a gift or a present, should come forward, his statement will be accepted and the promise will be fulfilled. Certainly, Fatimah (p.b.u.h.) had a superior right to have her statements accepted in the matter of the gifting of Fadak by the Holy Prophet (may Allah bless him and his descendants) to her.

"Verily, Amir al-mu'minin has commanded his slave Mubarak at-Tabari to restore Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah the daughter of the holy Prophet with all its borders, its rights and all slaves attached thereto. cereal crops and other things.

"The same has been restored to Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn al-Hasan ibn Zayd ibn `Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib and Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn al-Hasan ibn `Ali ibn al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib.

"Amir al-mu'minin has appointed the two of them as the agents representing the owners of the lands - the heirs of Fatimah. Know then this is the view of Amir al-mu'minin and that Allah has inspired him to obey the order of Allah and to win His pleasure and the pleasure of the Holy Prophet. Let also your subordinates know this. Behave towards Muhammad ibn Yahya and Muhammad ibn `Abdillah in the same manner as you used to behave towards Mubarak at-Tabari. Help them both to everything which has to do with its flourishing and prosperity and its improvement in abundance of cereals by Allah's will; and that is an end to the matter."

This is written this Wednesday, two nights past Dhu'l-qi'dah, the year 210 (15/2/826).

11. During the period of al-Ma'mun's caliphate Fadak was in the possession of Fatimah's descendants, and this continued during the caliphate of al-Mu'tasim (218/833 - 227/842) and al-Wathiq (227/842 - 232/ 847).

12. When Ja`far al-Mutawakkil became caliph (232/847 - 247/ 861), the one among them who was marked as an archenemy of the progeny of the Holy Prophet both of those alive and of those dead, gave the order to recapture Fadak from the descendants of Fatimah. (He seized it and granted it to Harmalah al-Hajjam or the Cupper), and after the death of al-Hajjam he granted it to al-Bazyar or the Falconer, a native of Tabaristan. (Kashf al-ghumnah, vol.2, pp.121 - 122; al-Bihar, [lst ed.], vol.8., p.108; Safinah al-bihar, vol.2, p.351). Abu Hilal al-`Askari- mentioned that his name was `Abdullah ibn `Umar al-Bazyar and added: "And there were in it (Fadak) eleven date-palm trees which the Holy Prophet had planted by his own hands. The descendants of Abu Talib used to gather these dates. When pilgrims (al-Hujjaj), entered Medina they donated the dates to them. Through this they received a considerable ruturn. This news reached al-Mu- tawakkil. He ordered `Abdullah ibn `Umar to cut up the fruits and to squeeze the juice from them. `Abdullah ibn `Umar sent a man named Bishr ibn Umayyah ath-Thaqafi who squeezed the fruits. It was reported that he made it into wine. It had not reached Basrah (on its way to the Caliph) before it decayed and al-Mutawakkil was killed." (al-Awa'il, p.209).

13. When al-Mutawakkil was killed and al-Muntasir (his son) succeeded him (247/861 - 248/862) he gave the order to restore Fadak to the descendants of al-Hasan and al-Husayn and delivered the donations of Abu Talib to them and this was in 248/862.

(Ref. for Nos.3-13-Futuh al-buldan, vol.1, pp.33-38; Mu`jam al-buldan, vol.4, pp.238-240; at-Tarikh, al-Ya`qubi, vol.2, p.199; vol.3, pp.48, 195-196; al-Kamil, Ibn al-Athir, vol.2, pp. 224-225; vol.3, pp. 457,497; vol.5, p.63; vol.7, p.116; al-`Iqd al-farid, vol.4, PP:216,283, 435; Wafa' alwafa, vol.3, pp.999-1000; at-Tabaqat al-kabir, vol.5, pp. 286-287; Tarikh al-Khulafa', pp.231-232, 356; Muruj adh-dhahab, vol.4, p.82; Sirah `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz, Ibn al-Jawzi, p.1l0;Subh al-a`sha vol.4, p.291; Jamharah rasa'il al-`Arab, vol.2, pp.331-332; vol. 3, pp. 509-510; `Alam an-nisa', vol.3, pp.1211 -1212; Ibn Abi'l-Hadid, vol.16, pp.277- 278: al-Awa'il, p.209; Kashf al-ghummah, vol.2, pp.120-122; al-Bihar, vol.8, pp.107-108).

14. It seemed that Fadak was recaptured from the descendants of Fatimah after the death of al-Muntasir (248/862), because Abu'l-Hasan, `Ali ibn `Isa al-Irbili (d. 692/1293) mentioned, "al-Mu`tadid (279/892 - 289/902) returned Fadak to the descendants of Fatimah. Then he mentioned that al-Muqtafi (289/902 - 295/908) seized it from them. It is said also that al-Muqtadir (295/908 - 320/932) returned it to them (the descendants of Fatimah)." (Kashf al-ghummah, vol.2, p.122; al-Bihar, vol.8, p.108: Safinah, vol.2, p.351).

15. And after this long period of recapturing and restoration, Fadak was returned to the possession of the usurpers and their heirs as it seems, no further mention was made in history and the curtain fell.

Is it (then that) the judgement of (the times of pagan) ignorance they desire? And who (else) can be better than Allah to judge for a people of assured faith. (Qur'an, 5:50)

In The Name of Allah Most Merciful and Compassionate

PREFACE

Seyyed Hossein Nasr

The Study of Shi'ism

Despite the vast amount of information and the number of factual details assembled during the past century by Western scholarship in the fields of orientalism and comparative religion, many gaps still exist in the knowledge of the various religions of the world, even on the level of historical facts. Moreover, until recently most of the studies carried out within these fields have suffered from a lack of metaphysical penetration and sympathetic insight. One of the most notable omissions in Western studies of the religions of the East, and of Islam in particular, has occurred in the case of Shi'ism. Until now Shi'ism has received little attention; and when it has been discussed, it has usually been relegated to the secondary and peripheral status of a religio-political "sect," a heterodoxy or even a heresy. Hence its importance in both the past and the present has been belittled far more than a fair and objective study of the matter would justify.

The present work hopes to redress partially the lack of ac- cessible and reliable English-language material pertaining to Shi'ism. It is the first of a series of books designed to bring to the English-speaking world accurate information about Shi'ism through the translation of writings by authentic Shi'ite represen tatives and of some of the traditional sources which, along with the Quran, form the foundation of Shi'ite Islam. The purpose of this series is to present Shi'ism as a living reality as it has been and as it is, in both its doctrinal and historical aspects. Thereby we can reveal yet another dimension of the Islamic tradition and make better known the richness of the Islamic revelation in its historical unfolding, which could have been willed only by Providence.

This task, however, is made particularly difficult in a European language and for a predominantly non-Muslim audience by the fact that to explain Shi'ism and the causes for its coming into being is to fall immediately into polemics with Sunni Islam. The issues which thus arise, in turn, if presented without the proper safeguards and without taking into account the audience involved could only be detrimental to the sympathetic understanding of Islam itself. In the traditional Islamic atmosphere where faith in the revelation is naturally very strong, the Sunni-Shi'ite polemics which have gone on for over thirteen centuries, and which have become especially accentuated since the Ottoman-Safavid rivalries dating from the tenth/sixteenth century, have never resulted in the rejection of Islam by anyone from either camp. In the same way the bitter medieval theological feuds among different Christian churches and schools never caused anyone to abandon Christianity itself, for the age was one characterized by faith. But were Christianity to be presented to Muslims beginning with a full description of all the points that separated, let us say, the Catholic and Orthodox churches in the Middle Ages, or even the branches of the early church, and all that the theologians of one group wrote against the other, the effect upon the Muslims' understanding of the Christian religion itself could only be negative. In fact a Muslim might begin to wonder how anyone could have remained Christian or how the Church could have survived despite all these divisions and controversies. Although the divisions within Islam are far fewer than those in Christianity, one would expect the same type of effect upon the Western reader faced with the Shi'ite-Sunni polemics. These controversies would naturally be viewed by such a reader from the outside and without the faith in Islam itself which has encompassed this whole debate since its inception and has provided its traditional context as well as the protection and support for the followers of both sides.

Despite this difficulty, however, Shi'ism must of necessity be studied and presented from its own point of view as well as from within the general matrix of Islam. This task is made necessary first of all because Shi'ism exists as an important historical reality within Islam and hence it must be studied as an objective religious fact. Secondly, the very attacks made against Islam and its unity by certain Western authors (who point to the Sunni-Shi'ite division and often fail to remember the similar divisions within every other world religion) necessitate a detailed and at the same time authentic study of Shi'ism within the total context of Islam. Had not such a demand existed it would not even have been necessary to present to the world outside Islam all the polemical arguments that have separated Sunnism and Shi'ism. This is especially true at a time when many among the Sunni and Shi'ite 'ulama' are seeking in every way possible to avoid confrontation with each other in order to safeguard the unity of Islam in a secularized world which threatens Islam from both the outside and the inside.

The attitude of this group of ulama is of course in a sense reminiscent of the ecumenism among religions, and also within a given religion, that is so often discussed today in the West. Most often, however, people search in these ecumenical movements for a common denominator which, in certain instances, sacrifices divinely ordained qualitative differences for the sake of a purely human and often quantitative egalitarianism. In such cases the so-called "ecumenical" forces in question are no more than a concealed form of the secularism and humanism which gripped the West at the time of the Renaissance and which in their own turn caused religious divisions within Christianity. This type of ecumenism, whose hidden motive is much more worldly than religious, goes hand in hand with the kind of charity that is willing to forego the love of God for the love of the neighbor and in fact insists upon the love of the neighbor in spite of a total lack of the love for God and the Transcendent. The mentality which advocates this kind of "charity" affords one more example of the loss of the transcendent dimension and the reduction of all things to the purely worldly. It is yet another manifestation of the secular character of modernism which in this case has penetrated into the supreme Christian virtue of charity and, to the extent that it has been successful, has deprived this virtue of any spiritual significance.

From the point of view of this type of ecumenical mentality, to speak approvingly of the differences between religions, or of the different orthodox schools within a single religion, is tantamount to betraying man and his hope for salvation and peace. A secular and humanistic ecumenism of this kind fails to see that real peace or salvation lies in Unity through this divinely ordained diversity and not in its rejection, and that the diversity of religions and also of the orthodox schools within each religion are signs of the Divine compassion, which seeks to convey the message of heaven to men possessing different spiritual and psychological qualities. True ecumenism would be a search in depth after Unity, essential and Transcendent Unity, and not the quest after a uniformity which would destroy all qualitative distinctions. It would accept and honor not only the sublime doctrines but even the minute details of every tradition, and yet see the Unity which shines through these very outward differences. And within each religion true ecumenism would respect the other orthodox schools and yet remain faithful to every facet of the traditional background of the school in question. It would be less harmful to oppose other religions, as has been done by so many religious authorities throughout history, than to be willing to destroy essential aspects of one's own religion in order to reach a common denominator with another group of men who are asked to undergo the same losses. To say the least, a league of religions could not guarantee religious peace, any more than the League of Nations guaranteed political peace.

Different religions have been necessary in the long history of mankind because there have been different "humanities" or human collectivities on earth. There having been different recipients of the Divine message, there has been more than one echo of the Divine Word. God has said "I" to each of these "humanities" or communities; hence the plurality of religions.[1] Within each religion as well, especially within those that have been destined for many ethnic groups, different orthodox interpretations of the tradition, of the one heavenly message, have been necessary in order to guarantee the integration of the different psychological and ethnic groupings into a single spiritual perspective. It is difficult to imagine how the Far Eastern peoples could have become Buddhist without the Mahayana school, or some of the Eastern peoples Muslim without Shi'ism. The presence of such divisions within the religious tradition in question does not contradict its inner unity and transcendence. Rather it has been the way of ensuring spiritual unity in a world of diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds.

Of course, since the exoteric religious perspective relies on outward forms, it always tends in every religion to make its own interpretation the only interpretation. That is why a particular school in any religion chooses a single aspect of the religion and attaches itself so intensely to that one aspect that it forgets and even negates all other aspects. Only on the esoteric level of religious experience can there be understanding of the inherent limitation of being bound to only one aspect of the total Truth; only on the esoteric level can each religious assertion be properly placed so as not to destroy the Transcendent Unity which is beyond and yet dwells within the outward forms and determinations of a particular religion or religious school.

Shi'ism in Islam should be studied in this light: as an affirmation of a particular dimension of Islam which is made central and in fact taken by Shi'ites to be Islam as such. It was not a movement that in any way destroyed the Unity of Islam, but one that added to the richness of the historical deployment and spread of the Quranic message. And despite its exclusiveness, it contains within its forms the Unity which binds all aspects of Islam together. Like Sunnism, Sufism and everything else that is genuinely Islamic, Shi'ism was already contained as a seed in the Holy Quran and in the earliest manifestations of the revelation, and belongs to the totality of Islamic orthodoxy.[2]

Moreover, in seeking to draw closer together in the spirit of a true ecumenism in the above sense, as is advocated today by both the Sunni and Shi'ite religious authorities, Shi'ism and Sunnism must not cease to be what they are and what they have always been. Shi'ism, therefore, must be presented in all its fullness, even in those aspects which contradict Sunni interpretations of certain events in Islamic history, which in any case are open to various interpretations. Sunnism and Shi'ism must first of all remain faithful to themselves and to their own traditional foundations before they can engage in a discourse for the sake of Islam or, more generally speaking, religious values as such. But if they are to sacrifice their integrity for a common denominator which would of necessity fall below the fullness of each, they will only have succeeded in destroying the traditional foundation which has preserved both schools and guaranteed their vitality over the centuries. Only Sufism or gnosis('irfan) can reach that Unity which embraces these two facets of Islam and yet transcends their outward differences. Only Islamic esotericism can see the legitimacy and meaning of each and the real significance of the interpretation each has made of Islam and of Islamic history.

Without, therefore, wanting to reduce Shi'ism to a least common denominator with Sunnism or to be apologetic, this book presents Shi'ism as a religious reality and an important aspect of the Islamic tradition. Such a presentation will make possible a more intimate knowledge of Islam in its multidimensional reality but at the same time it will pose certain difficulties of a polemical nature which can be resolved only on the level which transcends polemics altogether. As already mentioned, the presentation of Shi'ism in its totality and therefore including its polemical aspects, while nothing new for the Sunni world, especially since the intensification of Sunni-Shi'ite polemics during the Ottoman and Safavid periods, would certainly have an adverse effect upon the non-Muslim reader if the principles mentioned above were to be forgotten.

In order to understand Islam fully it must always be remembered that it, like other religions, contained in itself from the beginning the possibility of different types of interpretation: (1) that Shi'ism and Sunnism, while opposed to each other on certain important aspects of sacred history, are united in the acceptance of the Quran as the Word of God and in the basic principles ofthe faith; (2) that Shi'ism bases itself on a particular dimension of Islam and on an aspect of the nature of the Prophet as continued later in the line of the Imams and the Prophet's Household to the exclusion of, and finally in opposition to, another aspect which is contained in Sunnism; (3) and finally, that the Shi'ite-Sunni polemics can be put aside and the position of each of these schools explained only on the level of esotericism, which transcends their differences and yet unites them inwardly.

Fundamental Elements of Shi'ism

Although in Islam no political or social movement has ever been separated from religion, which from the point of view of Islam necessarily embraces all things, Shi'ism was not brought into existence only by the question of the political succession to the Prophet of Islam-upon whom be blessings and peace-as so many Western works claim (although this question was of course of great importance). The problem of political succession may be said to be the element that crystallized the Shi'ites into a distinct group, and political suppression in later periods, especially the martyrdom of Imam Husayn-upon whom be peace-only accentuated this tendency ofthe Shi'ites to see themselves as a separate community within the Islamic world. The principal cause of the coming into being of Shi'ism, however, lies in the fact that this possibility existed within the Islamic revelation itself and so had to be realized. Inasmuch as there were exoteric and esoteric interpretations from the very beginning, from which developed the schools (madhhab ) of the Shari'ah and Sufism in the Sunni world, there also had to be an interpretation of Islam which would combine these elements in a single whole. This possibility was realized in Shi'ism, for which the Imam is the person in whom these two aspects of traditional authority are united and in whom the religious life is marked by a sense of tragedy and martyrdom. There had to be the possibility, we might say, of an esotericismat least in its aspect of love rather than of pure gnosis-which would flow into the exoteric domain and penetrate into even the theological dimension of the religion, rather than remain confined to its purely inward aspect. Such a possibility wasShi'ism. Hence the question which arose was not so much who should be the successor of the Holy Prophet as what the function and qualifications of such a person would be.

The distinctive institution of Shi'ism is the Imamate and the question of the Imamate is inseparable from that of walayat, or the esoteric function of interpreting the inner mysteries of the Holy Quran and the Shari'ah.[3] According to the Shi'ite view the successor of the Prophet of Islam must be one who not only rules over the community in justice but also is able to interpret the Divine Law and its esoteric meaning. Hence he must be free from error and sin(ma'sum) and he must be chosen from on high by divine decree(nass) through the Prophet. The whole ethos of Shi'ism revolves around the basic notion of walayat, which is intimately connected with the notion of sancitity(wilayah) in Sufism. At the same time walayat contains certain implications on the level of the Shari'ah inasmuch as the Imam, or he who administers the function of walayat, is also the interpreter of religion for the religious community and its guide and legitimate ruler.

It can be argued quite convincingly that the very demand of 'Ali for allegiance(bay'ah) from the whole Islamic community at the moment that he became caliph implies that he accepted the method of selecting the caliph by the voice of the majority which had been followed in the case of the three khulafa' rashidun or "rightly-guided caliphs" before him, and that thereby he accepted the previous caliphs insofar as they were rulers and administrators of the Islamic community. What is also certain from the Shi'ite point of view, however, is that he did not accept their function as Imams in the Shi'ite sense of possessing the power and function of giving the esoteric interpretations of the inner mysteries of the Holy Quran and the Shari'ah, as is seen by his insistence from the beginning that he was the heir and inheritor(wasi) of the Prophet and the Prophet's legitimate successor in the Shi'ite sense of "succession." The Sunni-Shi'ite dispute over the successors to the Holy Prophet could be resolved if it were recognized that in one case there is the question of administering a Divine Law and in the other of also revealing and interpretingits inner mysteries. The very life of Ali and his actions show that he accepted the previous caliphs as understood in the Sunni sense of khalifah (the ruler and the administrator of the Shari'ah), but confined the function of walayat, after the Prophet, to himself. That is why it is perfectly possible to respect him as a caliph in the Sunni sense and as an Imam in the Shi'ite sense, each in its own perspective.

The five principles of religion(usul al-din) as stated by Shi'ism include: tawhid or belief in Divine Unity; nubuwwah or prophecy; ma'ad or ressurrection; imamah or the Imamate, belief in the Imams as successors of the Prophet; and 'adl or Divine Justice. In the three basic principles-Unity, prophecy, and resurrectionSunnism and Shi'ism agree. It is only in the other two that they differ. In the question of the Imamate, it is the insistence on the esoteric function of the Imam that distinguishes the Shi'ite perspective from the Sunni; in the question of justice it is the emphasis placed upon this attribute as an intrinsic quality of the Divine Nature that is particular to Shi'ism. We might say that in the exoteric formulation of Sunni theology, especially as contained in Ash'arism, there is an emphasis upon the will of God. Whatever God wills is just, precisely because it is willed by God; and intelligence('aql) is in a sense subordinated to this will and to the "voluntarism" which characterizes this form of theology.[4] In Shi'ism, however, the quality of justice is considered as innate to the Divine Nature. God cannot act in an unjust manner because it is His Nature to be just. For Him to be unjust would violate His own Nature, which is impossible. Intelligence can judge the justness or unjustness of an act and this judgment is not completely suspended in favor of a pure voluntarism on the part of God. Hence, there is a greater emphasis upon intelligence('aql) in Shi'ite theology and a greater emphasis upon will(iradah) in Sunni kalam, or theology, at least in the predominant Ash'arite school. The secret of the greater affinity of Shi'ite theology for the "intellectual sciences"(al-'ulum al-'aqliyah) lies in part in this manner of viewing Divine Justice.[5]

Shi'ism also differs from Sunnism in its consideration of the means whereby the original message of the Quranic revelationreached the Islamic community, and thereby in certain aspects of the sacred history of Islam. There is no disagreement on the Quran and the Prophet, that is, on what constitutes the origin of the Islamic religion. The difference in view begins with the period immediately following the death of the Prophet. One might say that the personality of the Prophet contained two dimensions which were later to become crystallized into Sunnism and Shi'ism. Each of these two schools was later to reflect back upon the life and personality of the Prophet solely from its own point of view, thus leaving aside and forgetting or misconstruing the other dimension excluded from its own perspective. For Shi'ism the "dry" (in the alchemical sense) and "austere" aspect of the Prophet's personality as reflected in his successors in the Sunni world was equated with worldliness, while his "warm" and "compassionate" dimension was emphasized as his whole personality and as the essence of the nature of the Imams, who were considered to be a continuation of him.[6]

For the vast majority of the Islamic community, which supported the original caliphate, the companions(sahabah) of the Prophet represent the Prophet's heritage and the channel through which his message was transmitted to later generations. Within the early community the companions occupied a favored position and among them the first four caliphs stood out as a distinct group. It is through the companions that the sayings(hadith) and manner of living(sunnah) of the Prophet were transmitted to the second generation of Muslims. Shi'ism, however, concentrating on the question of walayat and insisting on the esoteric content of the prophetic message, saw in Ali and the Household of the Prophet(ahl-i bayt) , in its Shi'ite sense, the sole channel through which the original message of Islam was transmitted, although, paradoxically enough the majority of the descendants of the Prophet belonged to Sunnism and continue to do so until today. Hence, although most of the hadith literature in Shi'ism and Sunnism is alike, the chain of transmission in many instances is not the same. Also, inasmuch as the Imams constitute for Shi'ism a continuation of the spiritual authority of the Prophet-although not of course his law-bringing function-their sayings andactions represent a supplement to the prophetic hadith and sunnah. From a purely religious and spiritual point of view the Imams may be said to be for Shi'ism an extension of the personality of the Prophet during the succeeding centuries. Such collections of the sayings of the Imams as the Nahj al-balaghah of Ali and the Usul al-kafi, containing sayings of all the Imams, are for the Shi'ites a continuation of the hadith collections concerned with the sayings of the Prophet himself. In many Shi'ite collections of hadith, the sayings of the Prophet and of the Imams are combined. The grace(barakah) [7] of the Quran, as conveyed to the world by the Prophet, reached the Sunni community through the companions (foremost among them were Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, Ali, and a few others such as Anas and Salman), and during succeeding generations through the ulama and the Sufis, each in his own world. This barakah, however, reached the Shi'ite community especially through Ali and the Household of the Prophet-in its particular Shi'ite sense as referred to above and not simply in the sense of any Alid.

It is the intense love for Ali and his progeny through Fatimah that compensates for the lack of attention towards, and even neglect of, the other companions in Shi'ism. It might be said that the light of Ali and the Imams was so intense that it blinded the Shi'ites to the presence of the other companions, many of whom were saintly men and also had remarkable human qualities. Were it not for that intense love of Ali, the Shi'ite attitude towards the companions would hardly be conceivable and would appear unbalanced, as it surely must when seen from the outside and without consideration for the intensity of devotion to the Household of the Prophet. Certainly the rapid spread of Islam, which is one of the most evident extrinsic arguments for the divine origin of the religion, would have been inconceivable without the companions and foremost among them the caliphs. This fact itself demonstrates how the Shi'ite views concerning the companions and the whole of early Sunnism were held within the context of a religious family (that of the whole of Islam) whose existence was taken for granted. If Islam had not spread through the Sunni caliphs and leaders many of the Shi'ite argumentswould have had no meaning. Sunnism and its very success in the world must therefore be assumed as a necessary background for an understanding of Shi'ism, whose minority role, sense ofmartyrdom and esoteric qualities could only have been realized in the presence of the order which had previously been established by the Sunni majority and especially by the early companions and their entourage. This fact itself points to the inner bond relating Sunnism and Shi'ism to their common Quranic basis despite the outward polemics.

The barakah present in both Sunnism and Shi'ism has the same origin and quality, especially if we take into consideration Sufism, which exists in both segments of the Islamic community. The barakah is everywhere that which has issued from the Quran and the Prophet, and it is often referred to as the "Muhammadan barakah"(al-barakat al-muhammadiyah) .

Shi'ism and the general esoteric teachings of Islam which are usually identified with the essential teachings of Sufism have a very complex and intricate relationship.[8] Shi'ism must not be equated simply with Islamic esotericism as such. In the Sunni world Islamic esotericism manifests itself almost exclusively as Sufism, whereas in the Shi'ite world, in addition to a Sufism similar to that found in the Sunni world, there is an esoteric element based upon love(mahabbah) which colors the whole structure of the religion. It is based on love (or in the language of Hinduism, bhakta) rather than on pure gnosis or ma'rifah, which by definition is always limited to a small number. There are, of course, some who would equate original Shi'ism purely and simply with esotericism.[9] Within the Shi'ite tradition itself the proponents of "Shi'ite gnosis"('irfan-i shi'i) such as Sayyid Haydar Amuli speak of the equivalence of Shi'ism and Sufism. In fact in his major work, theJami' al-asrar (Compendium of Divine Mysteries), Amuli's main intention is to show that real Sufism and Shi'ism are the same.[10] But if we consider the whole of Shi'ism, then there is of course in addition to the esoteric element the exoteric side, the law which governs a human community. Ali ruled over a human society and the sixth Imam, Ja'far al-Sadiq, founded the Twelve-Imam Shi'ite school of law.Yet,as mentionedabove, esotericism, especially in the form of love, has always occupied what might be called a privileged position within Shi'ism, so that even the Shi'ite theology and creed contain formulations that are properly speaking more mystical than strictly theological.

In addition to its law and the esoteric aspect contained in Sufism and gnosis, Shi'ism contained from the beginning a type of Divine Wisdom, inherited from the Prophet and the Imams, which became the basis for the hikmah or sophia that later developed extensively in the Muslim world and incorporated into its structure suitable elements of the Graeco-Alexandrian, the Indian, and the Persian intellectual heritages. It is often said that Islamic philosophy came into being as a result of the translation of Greek texts and that after a few centuries Greek philosophy died out in the Muslim world and found a new home in the Latin West. This partially true account leaves out other basic aspects of the story, such as the central role of the Quran as the source of knowledge and truth for the Muslims; the fundamental role of the spiritual hermeneutics(ta'wil) practiced by Sufis and Shi'ites alike, through which all knowledge became related to the inner levels of meaning of the Sacred Book; and the more than one thousand years of traditional Islamic philosophy and theosophy which has continued to our day in Shi'ite Persia and in adjacent areas.[11] When we think of Shi'ism we must remember that, in addition to the law and the strictly esoteric teachings, Shi'ism possesses a "theosophy" or hikmah which made possible the vast development of later Islamic philosophy and the intellectual sciences from the beginning, enabling it to have a role in the intellectual life of Islam far outweighing its numerical size.

The respect accorded to the intellect as the ladder to Divine Unity, an element that is characteristic of all of Islam and especially emphasized by Shi'ism, helped create a traditional educational system in which rigorous training in logic went hand in hand with the religious and also the esoteric sciences. The traditional curriculum of the Shi'ite universities(madrasahs) includes to this day courses ranging from logic and mathematics to metaphysics and Sufism. The hierarchy of knowledge has madeof logic itself a ladder to reach the suprarational. Logical demonstration, especially burhan-or demonstration in its technical sense, which has played a role in Islamic logic that differs from its use in Western logic-came to be regarded as a reflection of the Divine Intellect itself, and with the help of its certainties the Shi'ite metaphysicians and theologians have sought to demonstrate with rigor the most metaphysical teachings of the religion. We see many examples of this method in the present book, which is itself the result of such a traditional madrasah education. It may present certain difficulties to the Western reader who is accustomed to the total divorce of mysticism and logic and for whom the certainty of logic has been used, or rather misused, for so long as a tool to destroy all other certainties, both religious and metaphysical. But the method itself has its root in a fundamental aspect of Islam-in which the arguments of religion are based not primarily on the miraculous but on the intellectually evident[12] -an aspect which has been strongly emphasized in Shi'ism and is reflected in both the content and the form of its traditional expositions.

Present State of Shi'ite Studies

Historical factors, such as the fact that the West never had the same direct political contact with Shi'ite Islam that it did with Sunni Islam, have caused the Occident to be less aware until now of Shi'ite Islam than of Sunnism. And Sunni Islam also has not always been understood properly or interpreted sympathetically by all Western scholars. The West came into direct contact with Islam in Spain, Sicily, and Palestine in the Middle Ages and in the Balkans during the Ottoman period. These encounters were all with Sunni Islam with the exception of limited contacts with Isma'ilism during the Crusades. In the colonial period India was the only large area in which a direct knowledge of Shi'ism was necessary for day-to-day dealings with Muslims. For this reason the few works in English dealing with Twelve-Imam Shi'ism are mostly connected with the Indian subcontinent.[13] As a result of this lack of familiarity many of the early Western orientalists brought the most fantastic charges against Shi'ism, such as that its views were forged by Jews disguised as Muslims. One of the reasons for this kind of attack, which can also be seen in the case of Sufism, is that this type of orientalist did not want to see in Islam any metaphysical or eschatological doctrines of an intellectual content, which would make of it something more than the famous "simple religion of the desert." Such writers therefore had to reject as spurious any metaphysical and spiritual doctrines found within the teachings of Shi'ism or Sufism. One or two works written during this period and dealing with Shi'ism were composed by missionaries who were particularly famous for their hatred of Islam.[14]

It is only during the last generation that a very limited number of Western scholars have sought to make a more serious study of Shi'ism. Chief among them are L. Massignon, who devoted a few major studies to early Arab Shi'ism, and H. Corbin, who has devoted a lifetime to the study of the whole of Shi'ism and its later intellectual development especially as centered in Persia, and who has made known to the Western world for the first time some of the metaphysical and theosophical richness of this as yet relatively unknown aspect of Islam.[15] Yet, despite the efforts of these and a few other scholars, much of Shi'ism remains to this day a closed book, and there has not appeared as yet an introductory work in English to present the whole of Shi'ism to one who is just beginning to delve into the subject.

The Present Book

It was to overcome this deficiency that in 1962 Professor Kenneth Morgan of Colgate University, who pursues the laudable goal of presenting Oriental religions to the West from the point of view of the authentic representatives of these religions, approached me with the suggestion that I supervise a series of three volumes dealing with Shi'ism and written from the Shi'ite point of view. Aware of the difficulty of such an undertaking, I accepted because of the realization of the importance which the completion of such a project might have upon the future of Islamic studies and even of comparative religion as a whole. The present work is the first in that series; the others will be a volume dealing with the Shi'ite view of the Quran, written also by 'Allamah[16] Tabataba'i, and an anthology of the sayings of the Shi'ite Imams.

During the summer of 1963 when Professor Morgan was in Tehran we visited 'Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i in Darakah, a small village by the mountains near Tehran, where the venerable Shi'ite authority was spending the summer months away from the heat of Qum where he usually resides. The meeting was dominated by the humble presence of a man who has devoted his whole life to the study of religion, in whom humility and the power of intellectual analysis are combined. As we walked back from the house through the winding and narrow roads of the village, which still belongs to a calm and peaceful traditional world not as yet perturbed by the sound and fury of modernism, Professor Morgan proposed that 'Allamah Tabataba'i write the general volume on Shi'ism in the series and also the volume on the Quran. Later I was able to gain the consent of this celebrated Shi'ite authority that he put aside his monumental Quranic commentary, al-Mizan, to devote some of his time to these volumes. Having studied for years with him in the fields of traditional philosophy and theosophy, I knew that of the traditional Shi'ite authorities he was the one most qualified to write such a work, a work which would be completely authentic from the Shi'ite point of view and at the same time based upon an intellectual foundation. I realized of course the innate difficulty of finding a person who would be a reputable religious authority, respected by the Shi'ite community and untainted by the influence of Western modes of thought, and at the same time well enough conversant with the Western world and the mentality of the Western reader to be able to address his arguments to them. Unfortunately, no ideal solution could be found to this problem, for in Persia, as elsewhere in the Muslim world, there are today usually two types of men concerned with religious questions: (1) the traditional authorities, who are as a rule completely unaware of the nature of the psychological and mental structure of modern man, or at best have a shallow knowledge of the modern world, and (2) the modernized so-called "intellectuals," whose attachment to Islam is often only sentimental and apologetic and who usually present a version of Islam which would not be acceptable to the traditional authorities or to the Muslim community(ummah) . Only during the past few years has a new class of scholars, still extremely small in number, come into being which is both orthodox and traditional in the profound sense of these terms and at the same time knows well the modern world and the language necessary to reach the intelligent Western reader.

In any case, since the aim of Professor Morgan was to have a description of Shi'ism by one of the respected traditional Shi'ite scholars, the ulama, it was necessary to turn to the first class, of which 'Allamah Tabataba'i is an eminent example. Of course one could not expect in such a case the deep understanding of the Western audience for whom the work is intended. Even his knowledge of Sunni Islam moves within the orbit of the traditional polemics between Sunnism and Shi'ism, which has been taken for granted until now by him as by so many other of the prominent ulama of both sides. There are several types of Muslim and in particular of Shi'ite ulama and among them some are not wellversed in theosophy and gnosis and limit themselves to the exoteric sciences. 'Allamah Tabataba'i represents that central and intellectually dominating class of Shi'ite ulama who have combined interest in jurisprudence and Quranic commentary with philosophy, theosophy, and Sufism and who represent a more universal interpretation of the Shi'ite point of view. Within the class of the traditional ulama, 'Allamah Tabataba'i possesses the distinction of being a master of both the Shari'ite and esoteric sciences and at the same time he is an outstanding hakim or traditional Islamic philosopher (or more exactly, "theosopher"). Hence he was asked to perform this important task despite all the difficulties inherent in the presentation of the polemical side of Shi'ism to a world that does not believe in the Islamic revelation to start with and for whom the intense love of Ali and his Household, held by the Shi'ites, simply does not exist. Certain explanations, therefore, are demanded that would not occur to a person writing and thinking solely within the Shi'ite world view.

Six years of collaboration with 'Allamah Tabataba'i and many journeys to Qum and even Mashhad, which he often visits in the summer, helped me to prepare the work gradually for translation into English-a task which requires a translation of meaning from one world to another, to a world that begins without the general background of knowledge and faith which the usual audience of 'Allamah Tabataba'i possesses. In editing the text so that it would make possible a thorough and profound under standing of the structure of Islam, I have sought to take into full consideration the differences existing between traditional and modern scholarship, and also the particular demands of the audience to which this work is addressed.[17] But putting aside the demands made by these two conditions, I have tried to remain as faithful to the original as possible so as to enable the non-Muslim reader to study not only the message but also the form and intellectual style of a traditional Muslim authority.

The reader must therefore always remember that the arguments presented in this book are not addressed by 'Allamah Tabataba'i to a mind that begins with doubt but to one that is grounded in certainty and is moreover immersed in the world of faith and religious dedication. The depth of the doubt and nihilism of certain types of modern man would be inconceivable to him. His arguments, therefore, may at times be difficult to grasp or unconvincing to some Western readers; they are only so, however, because he is addressing an audience whose demand for causality and whose conception of the levels of reality is not identical with that of the Western reader. Also there may be explanations in which too much is taken for granted, or repetitions which appear to insult the intelligence of the perspicacious Western reader in whom the analytical powers of the mind are usually more developed than among most Orientals.[18] In these cases, the characteristic manner of his presentation and the only world known to him, that of contemporary Islam in its traditional aspect, must be kept in mind. If the arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas for the proof of the existence of God do not appeal to most modern men, it is not because modern men are more intelligent than the medieval theologians, but because the medieval masters were addressing men of different mentalities with different needs for the explanation of causality. Likewise, 'Allamah Tabataba'i offers arguments addressed to the audience he knows, the traditional Muslim intelligentsia. If all of his arguments do not appeal to the Western reader, this should not be taken as proof of the contention that his conclusions are invalid.

To summarize, this book may be said to be the first general introduction to Shi'ism in modern times written by an outstanding contemporary Shi'ite authority. While meant for the larger world outside of Shi'ism, its arguments and methods of presentation are those of traditional Shi'ism, which he represents and of which he is a pillar. 'Allamah Tabataba'i has tried to present the traditional Shi'ite point of view as it is and as it has been believed in and practiced by generations of Shi'ites. He has sought to be faithful to Shi'ite views without regard for the possible reactions of the outside world and without brushing aside the particular features of Shi'ism that have been controversial. To transcend the polemical level, two religious schools would either have to put aside their differences in the face of a common danger, or the level of discourse would have to be shifted from the level of historical and theological facts and dogmas to purely metaphysical expositions. 'Allamah Tabataba'i has not taken either path but has remained content with describing Shi'ism as it is. He has sought to do full justice to the Shi'ite perspective in the light of the official position that he holds in the Shi'ite religious world as he is a master of both the exoteric(zahir) and the esoteric(batin) sciences. For those who know the Islamic world well it is easy to discern the outward difficulties that such an authority faces in expounding the total view of things and especially in exposing the esoteric doctrines which alone can claim true universality. He is seen in this book as the expositor and defender of Shi'ism in both its exoteric and esoteric aspects, to the extent that his position in the Shi'ite world has allowed him to speak openly of the esoteric teachings. But all that is uttered carries with it the voice of authority, which tradition alone provides. Behind the words of 'Allamah Tabataba'i stand fourteen centuries of Shi'ite Islam and the continuity and transmission of a sacred and rehigious knowledge made possible by the continuity of the Islamic tradition itself.

The Author

'Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i[19] was born in Tabriz in A.H. (lunar) 1321 or A.H. (solar) 1282, (A.D. 1903)[20] in a family of descendants of the Holy Prophet which for fourteen generations has produced outstanding Islamic scholars.[21] He received his earliest education in his native city, mastering the elements of Arabic and the religious sciences, and at about the age of twenty set out for the great Shi'ite University of Najaf to continue more advanced studies. Most students in the madrasahs follow the branch of "transmitted sciences"(al-'ulum al-naqliyah) , especially the sciences dealing with the Divine Law, fiqh or jurisprudence, and usul al-fiqh or the principles of jurisprudence. 'Allamah Tabataba'i, however, sought to master both branches of the traditional sciences: the transmitted and the intellectual. He studied Divine Law and the principles of jurisprudence with two of the great masters of that day, Mirza Muhammad Husayn Na'ini and Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Isfahani. He became such a master in this domain that had he kept completely to these fields he would have become one of the foremost mujtahids or authorities on Divine Law and would have been able to wield much political and social influence.

But such was not his destiny. He was more attracted to the intellectual sciences, and he studied assiduously the whole cycle of traditional mathematics with Sayyid Abu'l-Qasim Khwansari, and traditional Islamic philosophy, including the standard texts of the Shifa' of Ibn Sina, the Asfar of Sadr al-Din Shirazi and the Tamhid al-qawa'id of Ibn Turkah, with Sayyid Husayn Badkuba'i, himself a student of two of the most famous masters of the school of Tehran, Sayyid Abu'l-Hasan Jilwah and Aqa 'Ali Mudarris Zunuzi.[22]

In addition to formal learning, or what the traditional Muslim sources call "acquired science"('ilm-i husuli) , 'Allamah Taba- taba'i sought after that "immediate science"('ilm-i huduri) or gnosis through which knowledge turns into vision of the supernal realities. He was fortunate in finding a great master of Islamic gnosis, Mirza 'Ali Qadi, who initiated him into the Divine mysteries and guided him in his journey toward spiritual perfection. 'Allamah Tabataba'i once told me that before meeting Qadi he had studied the Fusus al-hikam of Ibn 'Arabi and thought that he knew it well. When he met this master of real spiritual authority he realized that he knew nothing. He also told me that when Mirza Ali Qadi began to teach the Fusus it was as if all the walls of the room were speaking of the reality of gnosis and participating in his exposition. Thanks to this master the years in Najaf became for 'Allamah Tabataba'i not only a period of intellectual attainment but also one of asceticism and spiritual practices, which enabled him to attain that state of spiritual realization often referred to as becoming divorced from the darkness of material limitations(tajrid) . He spent long periods in fasting and prayer and underwent a long interval during which he kept absolute silence. Today his presence carries with it the silence of perfect contemplation and concentration even when he is speaking.

'Allamah Tabataba'i returned to Tabriz in A.H. (solar) 1314 (A.D. 1934) and spent a few quiet years in that city teaching a small number of disciples, but he was as yet unknown to the religious circles of Persia at large. It was the devastating events of the Second World War and the Russian occupation of Persia that brought 'Allamah Tabataba'i from Tabriz to Qum in A.H. (solar) 1324 (A.D. 1945) Qum was then, and continues to be, the center of religious studies in Persia. In his quiet and unassuming manner 'Allamah Tabataba'i began to teach in this holy city, concentrating on Quranic commentary and traditional Islamic philosophy and theosophy, which had not been taught in Qum for many years.

His magnetic personality and spiritual presence soon attracted some of the most intelligent and competent of the students to him, and gradually he made the teachings of Mulla Sadra once again a cornerstone of the traditional curriculum. I still have a vivid memory of some of the sessions of his public lectures in one of the mosque-madrasahs of Qum where nearly four hundred students sat at his feet to absorb his wisdom.

The activities of 'Allamah Tabataba'i since he came to Qum have also included frequent visits to Tehran. After the Second World War, when Marxism was fashionable among some of the youth in Tehran, he was the only religious scholar who took the pains to study the philosophical basis of Communism and supply a response to dialectical materialism from the traditional point of view. The fruit of this effort was one of his major works, Usul-i falsafah wa rawish-i ri'alism (The Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism), in which he defended realism-in its traditional and medieval sense-against all dialectical philosophies. He also trained a number of disciples who belong to the community of Persians with a modern education.

Since his coming to Qum, 'Allamah Tabataba'i has been indefatigable in his efforts to convey the wisdom and intellectual message of Islam on three different levels: to a large number of traditional students in Qum, who are now scattered throughout Persia and other Shi'ite lands; to a more select group of students whom he has taught gnosis and Sufism in more intimate circles and who have usually met on Thursday evenings at his home or other private places; and also to a group of Persians with a modern education and occasionally non-Persians with whom he has met in Tehran. During the past ten or twelve years there have been regular sessions in Tehran attended by a select group of Persians, and in the fall season by Henry Corbin, sessions in which the most profound and pressing spiritual and intellectual problems have been discussed, and in which I have usually had the role of translator and interpreter. During these Years we have studied with 'Allamah Tabataba'i not only the classical texts of divine wisdom and gnosis but also a whole cycle of what might be called comparative gnosis, in which in each session the sacred texts of one of the major religions, containing mystical and gnostic teachings, such as the Tao Te-Ching, the Upanishads and the Gospel of John, were discussed and compared with Sufism and Islamic gnostic doctrines in general.

'Allamah Tabataba'i has therefore exercised a profound in- fluence in both the traditional and modern circles in Persia. He has tried to create a new intellectual elite among the modern educated classes who wish to be acquainted with Islamic intellectuality as well as with the modern world. Many among his traditional students who belong to the class of ulama have tried to follow his example in this important endeavor. Some of his students, such as Sayyid Jalal al-Din Ashtiyani of Mashhad University and Murtada Mutahhari of Tehran University, are themselves scholars of considerable reputation. 'Allamah Tabataba'i often speaks of others among his students who possess great spiritual qualities but do not manifest themselves outwardly.

In addition to a heavy program of teaching and guidance, 'Allamah Tabataba'i has occupied himself with writing many books and articles which attest to his remarkable intellectual powers and breadth of learning within the world of the traditional Islamic sciences.[23]

Today at his home in Qum the venerable authority devotes nearly all of his time to his Quranic commentary and the direction of some of his best students. He stands as a symbol of what is most permanent in the long tradition of Islamic scholarship and science, and his presence carries a fragrance which can only come from one who has tasted the fruit of Divine Knowledge. He exemplifies in his person the nobility, humility and quest after truth which have characterized the finest Muslim scholars over the ages. His knowledge and its exposition are a testimony to what real Islamic learning is, how profound and how metaphysical, and how different from so many of the shallow expositions of some of the orientalists or the distorted caricatures of so many Muslim modernists. Of course he does not have the awareness of the modern mentality and the nature of the modern world that might be desired, but that could hardly be expected in one whose life experience has been confined to the traditional circles in Persia and Iraq.

* * *

A word must be added about the system of transliteration of Arabic and Persian words and the manner in which reference is made to Islamic sources. In the question of transliteration I have followed the standard system used in most works on Islam (see the table on p. vii), but in making reference to Islamic books I have sought to remain completely faithful to the original manuscript. The author, like most other Persian writers, refers to the very well-known Arabic works in the Persian-speaking world in their Persian form and to the less well-known in the original Arabic. For example, the history of al-Tabari is referred to by the author as Tarikh-i Tabari, using the idafah construction in Persian, which gives the same meaning as the word "of" in English. This may appear somewhat disconcerting to one who knows Arabic but no Persian, but it conveys a feeling for the spiritual and religious climate of Persia where the two languages are used side by side. In any case such references by the author have been transliterated according to the original. I have only sought to make them uniform and to give enough indication in the bibliography to make clear which author and which work is in question.

In the bibliography also, only the works referred to by 'Allamah Tabataba'i as his sources have been included, and not any secondary or even other primary ones which I could have added myself. Also the entry in the bibliography is according to the name of the book and not the author, which has always been the method used in Islamic circles.

For technical reasons diacritical marks on Arabic words which have become common in English, and italics in the case of all Arabic words appearing in the text, have been employed only in the index and at the first appearance of the word. In the end I should like to thank Professor Kenneth Morgan, whose keen interest and commendable patience in this project has made its achievement possible, and Mr. William Chittick, who has helped me greatly in preparing the manuscript for publication.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Tehran

Rabi al-awwal, 1390

Urdibihisht, 1350

May, 1971

NOTES

1. See F. Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds, translated by Lord Northbourne, Londan, 1965, especially Ch. IX, "Religio Perennis."

2. See S. H. Nasr, Ideals and Realities of Islam, London, 1966, Ch. IV, "Sunnism and Shi'ism."

3. On walayat see S. H. Nasr, Ideals, pp. 161-l62, and the many writings of H. Corbin on Shi'ism, which nearly always turn to this major theme.

4. For a profound analysis and criticism of Ash'arite theology see F. Schuon, "Dilemmas of Theological Speculation," Studies in Comparative Religion, Spring, 1969, pp.66-93.

5. See S. H. Nasr. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines, Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1964, Introduction; also S. H. Nasr, Science and Civilization in Islam, Cambridge (U.S.A.). 1968, Chapter II.

6. This idea was first formulated in an as yet unpublished article of F. Schuon entitled "Images d'Islam," some elements of which can be found in the same author's Das Ewige im Vorganglichkeit, translated by T. Burckhardt, Weilheim/ Oberbayern, 1970, in the Chapter entitled "Blick auf den Islam," pp. 111-129.

7. This term is nearly impossible to translate into English, the closest to an equivalent being the word "grace." if we do not oppose grace to the naturol order as is done in most Christian theological texts. See S. H. Nasr, Three Muslim Sages, Cambridge (U.S.A.). 1964, pp.105-106.

8. See our study "Shi'ism and Sufism: Their Relationship in Essence and in History," Religious Studies, October 1970, pp.229-242; also in our Sufi Essays, Albany. 1972.

9. This position is especially defended by H. Corbin, who has devoted so many penetrating studies to Shi'ism.

10. See H. Corbin's introduction to Sayyid Haydar Amuli, La Philosophie Shi'ite, Tehran-Paris, 1969.

11. The only history of philosophy in Western languages which takes these elements into account is H. Corbin (with the collaboration of S. H. Nasr and O. Yahaya), Histoire de la philosophie islamique, vol.I, Paris, 1963.

12. This question has been treated with great lucidity in F. Schuon, Understanding Islam, translated by D. M. Matheson, London, 1963.

13. See for example J. N. Hollister, The Shi'a of India, London, 1953; A. A. A. Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law, London, 1887; and N. B. Baillie, A Digest of Moohummudan Law, London, 1887. Of course in Iraq also the British were faced with a mixed Sunni-Shi'ite population but perhaps because of the relatively small size of the country this contact never gave rise to serious scholarly concern with Shi'ite sources as it did in India.

14. We especially have in mind D. M. Donaldson's The Shi'ie Religion, London, 1933, which is still the standard work on Shi'ism in Western universities. Many of the works written on the Shi'ites in India are also by missionaries who were severely opposed to Islam.

15. Some of the works of Corbin dealing more directly with Twelve-Imam Shi'ism itself include: "Pour une morphologie de la spiritualite shi'ite," EranosJahrbuch, XXIX, 1960; "Le combat spirituel du shi'isme," Eranos-Jahrbuch, XXX, 1961; and "Au 'pays' de l'Imam cache, "Eranos-Jahrbuch, XXXII, 1963. Many of Corbin's writings on Shi'ism have been brought together in his forthcoming En Islam iranien.

16. 'Allamah is an honorific term in Arabic, Persian and other Islamic languages meaning "very learned."

17. For my own views on the relationships between Sunnism and Shi'ism see Ideals and Realities of Islam, Ch. VI.

18. On this important question of the difference between the Oriental and Western dialectic see F. Schuon, "La dialectique orientale et son enracinement dans la foi," Logique et Transcendence, Paris, 1970, pp. 129-169.

19. An account in Persian of 'Allamah Tabataba'i by one of his outstanding students, Sayyid Jalal al-Din Ashtiyani, can be found in Ma'arif-i islami, vol. V, 1347 (A. H. solar), pp. 48-50.

20. since the beginning of the reign of Reza Shah the Persians have been using even more than before the solar hegira calendar in addition to the lunar, the former for civil and daily purposes and the latter for religious functions. In the present work all Islamic dates are lunar unless otherwise specified.

21. The title "Sayyid" in 'Allamah Tabataba'i's name is itself an indication of his being a descendant of the Prophet. In Persia the term sayyid (or seyyed) is used exclusively in this sense while in the Arab world it is usually used as the equivalent of "gentleman" or "Mr."

22. On these figures see S. H. Nasr, "The School of Ispahan," "Sadr al-Din Shirazi" and "Sabziwari" in M. M. Sharif (ed), A History of Muslim Philosophy, vol. II, Wiesbaden, 1966.

23. See the bibliography for a complete list of the writings of 'Allamah Tabataba'i.

In The Name of Allah Most Merciful and Compassionate

PREFACE

Seyyed Hossein Nasr

The Study of Shi'ism

Despite the vast amount of information and the number of factual details assembled during the past century by Western scholarship in the fields of orientalism and comparative religion, many gaps still exist in the knowledge of the various religions of the world, even on the level of historical facts. Moreover, until recently most of the studies carried out within these fields have suffered from a lack of metaphysical penetration and sympathetic insight. One of the most notable omissions in Western studies of the religions of the East, and of Islam in particular, has occurred in the case of Shi'ism. Until now Shi'ism has received little attention; and when it has been discussed, it has usually been relegated to the secondary and peripheral status of a religio-political "sect," a heterodoxy or even a heresy. Hence its importance in both the past and the present has been belittled far more than a fair and objective study of the matter would justify.

The present work hopes to redress partially the lack of ac- cessible and reliable English-language material pertaining to Shi'ism. It is the first of a series of books designed to bring to the English-speaking world accurate information about Shi'ism through the translation of writings by authentic Shi'ite represen tatives and of some of the traditional sources which, along with the Quran, form the foundation of Shi'ite Islam. The purpose of this series is to present Shi'ism as a living reality as it has been and as it is, in both its doctrinal and historical aspects. Thereby we can reveal yet another dimension of the Islamic tradition and make better known the richness of the Islamic revelation in its historical unfolding, which could have been willed only by Providence.

This task, however, is made particularly difficult in a European language and for a predominantly non-Muslim audience by the fact that to explain Shi'ism and the causes for its coming into being is to fall immediately into polemics with Sunni Islam. The issues which thus arise, in turn, if presented without the proper safeguards and without taking into account the audience involved could only be detrimental to the sympathetic understanding of Islam itself. In the traditional Islamic atmosphere where faith in the revelation is naturally very strong, the Sunni-Shi'ite polemics which have gone on for over thirteen centuries, and which have become especially accentuated since the Ottoman-Safavid rivalries dating from the tenth/sixteenth century, have never resulted in the rejection of Islam by anyone from either camp. In the same way the bitter medieval theological feuds among different Christian churches and schools never caused anyone to abandon Christianity itself, for the age was one characterized by faith. But were Christianity to be presented to Muslims beginning with a full description of all the points that separated, let us say, the Catholic and Orthodox churches in the Middle Ages, or even the branches of the early church, and all that the theologians of one group wrote against the other, the effect upon the Muslims' understanding of the Christian religion itself could only be negative. In fact a Muslim might begin to wonder how anyone could have remained Christian or how the Church could have survived despite all these divisions and controversies. Although the divisions within Islam are far fewer than those in Christianity, one would expect the same type of effect upon the Western reader faced with the Shi'ite-Sunni polemics. These controversies would naturally be viewed by such a reader from the outside and without the faith in Islam itself which has encompassed this whole debate since its inception and has provided its traditional context as well as the protection and support for the followers of both sides.

Despite this difficulty, however, Shi'ism must of necessity be studied and presented from its own point of view as well as from within the general matrix of Islam. This task is made necessary first of all because Shi'ism exists as an important historical reality within Islam and hence it must be studied as an objective religious fact. Secondly, the very attacks made against Islam and its unity by certain Western authors (who point to the Sunni-Shi'ite division and often fail to remember the similar divisions within every other world religion) necessitate a detailed and at the same time authentic study of Shi'ism within the total context of Islam. Had not such a demand existed it would not even have been necessary to present to the world outside Islam all the polemical arguments that have separated Sunnism and Shi'ism. This is especially true at a time when many among the Sunni and Shi'ite 'ulama' are seeking in every way possible to avoid confrontation with each other in order to safeguard the unity of Islam in a secularized world which threatens Islam from both the outside and the inside.

The attitude of this group of ulama is of course in a sense reminiscent of the ecumenism among religions, and also within a given religion, that is so often discussed today in the West. Most often, however, people search in these ecumenical movements for a common denominator which, in certain instances, sacrifices divinely ordained qualitative differences for the sake of a purely human and often quantitative egalitarianism. In such cases the so-called "ecumenical" forces in question are no more than a concealed form of the secularism and humanism which gripped the West at the time of the Renaissance and which in their own turn caused religious divisions within Christianity. This type of ecumenism, whose hidden motive is much more worldly than religious, goes hand in hand with the kind of charity that is willing to forego the love of God for the love of the neighbor and in fact insists upon the love of the neighbor in spite of a total lack of the love for God and the Transcendent. The mentality which advocates this kind of "charity" affords one more example of the loss of the transcendent dimension and the reduction of all things to the purely worldly. It is yet another manifestation of the secular character of modernism which in this case has penetrated into the supreme Christian virtue of charity and, to the extent that it has been successful, has deprived this virtue of any spiritual significance.

From the point of view of this type of ecumenical mentality, to speak approvingly of the differences between religions, or of the different orthodox schools within a single religion, is tantamount to betraying man and his hope for salvation and peace. A secular and humanistic ecumenism of this kind fails to see that real peace or salvation lies in Unity through this divinely ordained diversity and not in its rejection, and that the diversity of religions and also of the orthodox schools within each religion are signs of the Divine compassion, which seeks to convey the message of heaven to men possessing different spiritual and psychological qualities. True ecumenism would be a search in depth after Unity, essential and Transcendent Unity, and not the quest after a uniformity which would destroy all qualitative distinctions. It would accept and honor not only the sublime doctrines but even the minute details of every tradition, and yet see the Unity which shines through these very outward differences. And within each religion true ecumenism would respect the other orthodox schools and yet remain faithful to every facet of the traditional background of the school in question. It would be less harmful to oppose other religions, as has been done by so many religious authorities throughout history, than to be willing to destroy essential aspects of one's own religion in order to reach a common denominator with another group of men who are asked to undergo the same losses. To say the least, a league of religions could not guarantee religious peace, any more than the League of Nations guaranteed political peace.

Different religions have been necessary in the long history of mankind because there have been different "humanities" or human collectivities on earth. There having been different recipients of the Divine message, there has been more than one echo of the Divine Word. God has said "I" to each of these "humanities" or communities; hence the plurality of religions.[1] Within each religion as well, especially within those that have been destined for many ethnic groups, different orthodox interpretations of the tradition, of the one heavenly message, have been necessary in order to guarantee the integration of the different psychological and ethnic groupings into a single spiritual perspective. It is difficult to imagine how the Far Eastern peoples could have become Buddhist without the Mahayana school, or some of the Eastern peoples Muslim without Shi'ism. The presence of such divisions within the religious tradition in question does not contradict its inner unity and transcendence. Rather it has been the way of ensuring spiritual unity in a world of diverse cultural and ethnic backgrounds.

Of course, since the exoteric religious perspective relies on outward forms, it always tends in every religion to make its own interpretation the only interpretation. That is why a particular school in any religion chooses a single aspect of the religion and attaches itself so intensely to that one aspect that it forgets and even negates all other aspects. Only on the esoteric level of religious experience can there be understanding of the inherent limitation of being bound to only one aspect of the total Truth; only on the esoteric level can each religious assertion be properly placed so as not to destroy the Transcendent Unity which is beyond and yet dwells within the outward forms and determinations of a particular religion or religious school.

Shi'ism in Islam should be studied in this light: as an affirmation of a particular dimension of Islam which is made central and in fact taken by Shi'ites to be Islam as such. It was not a movement that in any way destroyed the Unity of Islam, but one that added to the richness of the historical deployment and spread of the Quranic message. And despite its exclusiveness, it contains within its forms the Unity which binds all aspects of Islam together. Like Sunnism, Sufism and everything else that is genuinely Islamic, Shi'ism was already contained as a seed in the Holy Quran and in the earliest manifestations of the revelation, and belongs to the totality of Islamic orthodoxy.[2]

Moreover, in seeking to draw closer together in the spirit of a true ecumenism in the above sense, as is advocated today by both the Sunni and Shi'ite religious authorities, Shi'ism and Sunnism must not cease to be what they are and what they have always been. Shi'ism, therefore, must be presented in all its fullness, even in those aspects which contradict Sunni interpretations of certain events in Islamic history, which in any case are open to various interpretations. Sunnism and Shi'ism must first of all remain faithful to themselves and to their own traditional foundations before they can engage in a discourse for the sake of Islam or, more generally speaking, religious values as such. But if they are to sacrifice their integrity for a common denominator which would of necessity fall below the fullness of each, they will only have succeeded in destroying the traditional foundation which has preserved both schools and guaranteed their vitality over the centuries. Only Sufism or gnosis('irfan) can reach that Unity which embraces these two facets of Islam and yet transcends their outward differences. Only Islamic esotericism can see the legitimacy and meaning of each and the real significance of the interpretation each has made of Islam and of Islamic history.

Without, therefore, wanting to reduce Shi'ism to a least common denominator with Sunnism or to be apologetic, this book presents Shi'ism as a religious reality and an important aspect of the Islamic tradition. Such a presentation will make possible a more intimate knowledge of Islam in its multidimensional reality but at the same time it will pose certain difficulties of a polemical nature which can be resolved only on the level which transcends polemics altogether. As already mentioned, the presentation of Shi'ism in its totality and therefore including its polemical aspects, while nothing new for the Sunni world, especially since the intensification of Sunni-Shi'ite polemics during the Ottoman and Safavid periods, would certainly have an adverse effect upon the non-Muslim reader if the principles mentioned above were to be forgotten.

In order to understand Islam fully it must always be remembered that it, like other religions, contained in itself from the beginning the possibility of different types of interpretation: (1) that Shi'ism and Sunnism, while opposed to each other on certain important aspects of sacred history, are united in the acceptance of the Quran as the Word of God and in the basic principles ofthe faith; (2) that Shi'ism bases itself on a particular dimension of Islam and on an aspect of the nature of the Prophet as continued later in the line of the Imams and the Prophet's Household to the exclusion of, and finally in opposition to, another aspect which is contained in Sunnism; (3) and finally, that the Shi'ite-Sunni polemics can be put aside and the position of each of these schools explained only on the level of esotericism, which transcends their differences and yet unites them inwardly.

Fundamental Elements of Shi'ism

Although in Islam no political or social movement has ever been separated from religion, which from the point of view of Islam necessarily embraces all things, Shi'ism was not brought into existence only by the question of the political succession to the Prophet of Islam-upon whom be blessings and peace-as so many Western works claim (although this question was of course of great importance). The problem of political succession may be said to be the element that crystallized the Shi'ites into a distinct group, and political suppression in later periods, especially the martyrdom of Imam Husayn-upon whom be peace-only accentuated this tendency ofthe Shi'ites to see themselves as a separate community within the Islamic world. The principal cause of the coming into being of Shi'ism, however, lies in the fact that this possibility existed within the Islamic revelation itself and so had to be realized. Inasmuch as there were exoteric and esoteric interpretations from the very beginning, from which developed the schools (madhhab ) of the Shari'ah and Sufism in the Sunni world, there also had to be an interpretation of Islam which would combine these elements in a single whole. This possibility was realized in Shi'ism, for which the Imam is the person in whom these two aspects of traditional authority are united and in whom the religious life is marked by a sense of tragedy and martyrdom. There had to be the possibility, we might say, of an esotericismat least in its aspect of love rather than of pure gnosis-which would flow into the exoteric domain and penetrate into even the theological dimension of the religion, rather than remain confined to its purely inward aspect. Such a possibility wasShi'ism. Hence the question which arose was not so much who should be the successor of the Holy Prophet as what the function and qualifications of such a person would be.

The distinctive institution of Shi'ism is the Imamate and the question of the Imamate is inseparable from that of walayat, or the esoteric function of interpreting the inner mysteries of the Holy Quran and the Shari'ah.[3] According to the Shi'ite view the successor of the Prophet of Islam must be one who not only rules over the community in justice but also is able to interpret the Divine Law and its esoteric meaning. Hence he must be free from error and sin(ma'sum) and he must be chosen from on high by divine decree(nass) through the Prophet. The whole ethos of Shi'ism revolves around the basic notion of walayat, which is intimately connected with the notion of sancitity(wilayah) in Sufism. At the same time walayat contains certain implications on the level of the Shari'ah inasmuch as the Imam, or he who administers the function of walayat, is also the interpreter of religion for the religious community and its guide and legitimate ruler.

It can be argued quite convincingly that the very demand of 'Ali for allegiance(bay'ah) from the whole Islamic community at the moment that he became caliph implies that he accepted the method of selecting the caliph by the voice of the majority which had been followed in the case of the three khulafa' rashidun or "rightly-guided caliphs" before him, and that thereby he accepted the previous caliphs insofar as they were rulers and administrators of the Islamic community. What is also certain from the Shi'ite point of view, however, is that he did not accept their function as Imams in the Shi'ite sense of possessing the power and function of giving the esoteric interpretations of the inner mysteries of the Holy Quran and the Shari'ah, as is seen by his insistence from the beginning that he was the heir and inheritor(wasi) of the Prophet and the Prophet's legitimate successor in the Shi'ite sense of "succession." The Sunni-Shi'ite dispute over the successors to the Holy Prophet could be resolved if it were recognized that in one case there is the question of administering a Divine Law and in the other of also revealing and interpretingits inner mysteries. The very life of Ali and his actions show that he accepted the previous caliphs as understood in the Sunni sense of khalifah (the ruler and the administrator of the Shari'ah), but confined the function of walayat, after the Prophet, to himself. That is why it is perfectly possible to respect him as a caliph in the Sunni sense and as an Imam in the Shi'ite sense, each in its own perspective.

The five principles of religion(usul al-din) as stated by Shi'ism include: tawhid or belief in Divine Unity; nubuwwah or prophecy; ma'ad or ressurrection; imamah or the Imamate, belief in the Imams as successors of the Prophet; and 'adl or Divine Justice. In the three basic principles-Unity, prophecy, and resurrectionSunnism and Shi'ism agree. It is only in the other two that they differ. In the question of the Imamate, it is the insistence on the esoteric function of the Imam that distinguishes the Shi'ite perspective from the Sunni; in the question of justice it is the emphasis placed upon this attribute as an intrinsic quality of the Divine Nature that is particular to Shi'ism. We might say that in the exoteric formulation of Sunni theology, especially as contained in Ash'arism, there is an emphasis upon the will of God. Whatever God wills is just, precisely because it is willed by God; and intelligence('aql) is in a sense subordinated to this will and to the "voluntarism" which characterizes this form of theology.[4] In Shi'ism, however, the quality of justice is considered as innate to the Divine Nature. God cannot act in an unjust manner because it is His Nature to be just. For Him to be unjust would violate His own Nature, which is impossible. Intelligence can judge the justness or unjustness of an act and this judgment is not completely suspended in favor of a pure voluntarism on the part of God. Hence, there is a greater emphasis upon intelligence('aql) in Shi'ite theology and a greater emphasis upon will(iradah) in Sunni kalam, or theology, at least in the predominant Ash'arite school. The secret of the greater affinity of Shi'ite theology for the "intellectual sciences"(al-'ulum al-'aqliyah) lies in part in this manner of viewing Divine Justice.[5]

Shi'ism also differs from Sunnism in its consideration of the means whereby the original message of the Quranic revelationreached the Islamic community, and thereby in certain aspects of the sacred history of Islam. There is no disagreement on the Quran and the Prophet, that is, on what constitutes the origin of the Islamic religion. The difference in view begins with the period immediately following the death of the Prophet. One might say that the personality of the Prophet contained two dimensions which were later to become crystallized into Sunnism and Shi'ism. Each of these two schools was later to reflect back upon the life and personality of the Prophet solely from its own point of view, thus leaving aside and forgetting or misconstruing the other dimension excluded from its own perspective. For Shi'ism the "dry" (in the alchemical sense) and "austere" aspect of the Prophet's personality as reflected in his successors in the Sunni world was equated with worldliness, while his "warm" and "compassionate" dimension was emphasized as his whole personality and as the essence of the nature of the Imams, who were considered to be a continuation of him.[6]

For the vast majority of the Islamic community, which supported the original caliphate, the companions(sahabah) of the Prophet represent the Prophet's heritage and the channel through which his message was transmitted to later generations. Within the early community the companions occupied a favored position and among them the first four caliphs stood out as a distinct group. It is through the companions that the sayings(hadith) and manner of living(sunnah) of the Prophet were transmitted to the second generation of Muslims. Shi'ism, however, concentrating on the question of walayat and insisting on the esoteric content of the prophetic message, saw in Ali and the Household of the Prophet(ahl-i bayt) , in its Shi'ite sense, the sole channel through which the original message of Islam was transmitted, although, paradoxically enough the majority of the descendants of the Prophet belonged to Sunnism and continue to do so until today. Hence, although most of the hadith literature in Shi'ism and Sunnism is alike, the chain of transmission in many instances is not the same. Also, inasmuch as the Imams constitute for Shi'ism a continuation of the spiritual authority of the Prophet-although not of course his law-bringing function-their sayings andactions represent a supplement to the prophetic hadith and sunnah. From a purely religious and spiritual point of view the Imams may be said to be for Shi'ism an extension of the personality of the Prophet during the succeeding centuries. Such collections of the sayings of the Imams as the Nahj al-balaghah of Ali and the Usul al-kafi, containing sayings of all the Imams, are for the Shi'ites a continuation of the hadith collections concerned with the sayings of the Prophet himself. In many Shi'ite collections of hadith, the sayings of the Prophet and of the Imams are combined. The grace(barakah) [7] of the Quran, as conveyed to the world by the Prophet, reached the Sunni community through the companions (foremost among them were Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Uthman, Ali, and a few others such as Anas and Salman), and during succeeding generations through the ulama and the Sufis, each in his own world. This barakah, however, reached the Shi'ite community especially through Ali and the Household of the Prophet-in its particular Shi'ite sense as referred to above and not simply in the sense of any Alid.

It is the intense love for Ali and his progeny through Fatimah that compensates for the lack of attention towards, and even neglect of, the other companions in Shi'ism. It might be said that the light of Ali and the Imams was so intense that it blinded the Shi'ites to the presence of the other companions, many of whom were saintly men and also had remarkable human qualities. Were it not for that intense love of Ali, the Shi'ite attitude towards the companions would hardly be conceivable and would appear unbalanced, as it surely must when seen from the outside and without consideration for the intensity of devotion to the Household of the Prophet. Certainly the rapid spread of Islam, which is one of the most evident extrinsic arguments for the divine origin of the religion, would have been inconceivable without the companions and foremost among them the caliphs. This fact itself demonstrates how the Shi'ite views concerning the companions and the whole of early Sunnism were held within the context of a religious family (that of the whole of Islam) whose existence was taken for granted. If Islam had not spread through the Sunni caliphs and leaders many of the Shi'ite argumentswould have had no meaning. Sunnism and its very success in the world must therefore be assumed as a necessary background for an understanding of Shi'ism, whose minority role, sense ofmartyrdom and esoteric qualities could only have been realized in the presence of the order which had previously been established by the Sunni majority and especially by the early companions and their entourage. This fact itself points to the inner bond relating Sunnism and Shi'ism to their common Quranic basis despite the outward polemics.

The barakah present in both Sunnism and Shi'ism has the same origin and quality, especially if we take into consideration Sufism, which exists in both segments of the Islamic community. The barakah is everywhere that which has issued from the Quran and the Prophet, and it is often referred to as the "Muhammadan barakah"(al-barakat al-muhammadiyah) .

Shi'ism and the general esoteric teachings of Islam which are usually identified with the essential teachings of Sufism have a very complex and intricate relationship.[8] Shi'ism must not be equated simply with Islamic esotericism as such. In the Sunni world Islamic esotericism manifests itself almost exclusively as Sufism, whereas in the Shi'ite world, in addition to a Sufism similar to that found in the Sunni world, there is an esoteric element based upon love(mahabbah) which colors the whole structure of the religion. It is based on love (or in the language of Hinduism, bhakta) rather than on pure gnosis or ma'rifah, which by definition is always limited to a small number. There are, of course, some who would equate original Shi'ism purely and simply with esotericism.[9] Within the Shi'ite tradition itself the proponents of "Shi'ite gnosis"('irfan-i shi'i) such as Sayyid Haydar Amuli speak of the equivalence of Shi'ism and Sufism. In fact in his major work, theJami' al-asrar (Compendium of Divine Mysteries), Amuli's main intention is to show that real Sufism and Shi'ism are the same.[10] But if we consider the whole of Shi'ism, then there is of course in addition to the esoteric element the exoteric side, the law which governs a human community. Ali ruled over a human society and the sixth Imam, Ja'far al-Sadiq, founded the Twelve-Imam Shi'ite school of law.Yet,as mentionedabove, esotericism, especially in the form of love, has always occupied what might be called a privileged position within Shi'ism, so that even the Shi'ite theology and creed contain formulations that are properly speaking more mystical than strictly theological.

In addition to its law and the esoteric aspect contained in Sufism and gnosis, Shi'ism contained from the beginning a type of Divine Wisdom, inherited from the Prophet and the Imams, which became the basis for the hikmah or sophia that later developed extensively in the Muslim world and incorporated into its structure suitable elements of the Graeco-Alexandrian, the Indian, and the Persian intellectual heritages. It is often said that Islamic philosophy came into being as a result of the translation of Greek texts and that after a few centuries Greek philosophy died out in the Muslim world and found a new home in the Latin West. This partially true account leaves out other basic aspects of the story, such as the central role of the Quran as the source of knowledge and truth for the Muslims; the fundamental role of the spiritual hermeneutics(ta'wil) practiced by Sufis and Shi'ites alike, through which all knowledge became related to the inner levels of meaning of the Sacred Book; and the more than one thousand years of traditional Islamic philosophy and theosophy which has continued to our day in Shi'ite Persia and in adjacent areas.[11] When we think of Shi'ism we must remember that, in addition to the law and the strictly esoteric teachings, Shi'ism possesses a "theosophy" or hikmah which made possible the vast development of later Islamic philosophy and the intellectual sciences from the beginning, enabling it to have a role in the intellectual life of Islam far outweighing its numerical size.

The respect accorded to the intellect as the ladder to Divine Unity, an element that is characteristic of all of Islam and especially emphasized by Shi'ism, helped create a traditional educational system in which rigorous training in logic went hand in hand with the religious and also the esoteric sciences. The traditional curriculum of the Shi'ite universities(madrasahs) includes to this day courses ranging from logic and mathematics to metaphysics and Sufism. The hierarchy of knowledge has madeof logic itself a ladder to reach the suprarational. Logical demonstration, especially burhan-or demonstration in its technical sense, which has played a role in Islamic logic that differs from its use in Western logic-came to be regarded as a reflection of the Divine Intellect itself, and with the help of its certainties the Shi'ite metaphysicians and theologians have sought to demonstrate with rigor the most metaphysical teachings of the religion. We see many examples of this method in the present book, which is itself the result of such a traditional madrasah education. It may present certain difficulties to the Western reader who is accustomed to the total divorce of mysticism and logic and for whom the certainty of logic has been used, or rather misused, for so long as a tool to destroy all other certainties, both religious and metaphysical. But the method itself has its root in a fundamental aspect of Islam-in which the arguments of religion are based not primarily on the miraculous but on the intellectually evident[12] -an aspect which has been strongly emphasized in Shi'ism and is reflected in both the content and the form of its traditional expositions.

Present State of Shi'ite Studies

Historical factors, such as the fact that the West never had the same direct political contact with Shi'ite Islam that it did with Sunni Islam, have caused the Occident to be less aware until now of Shi'ite Islam than of Sunnism. And Sunni Islam also has not always been understood properly or interpreted sympathetically by all Western scholars. The West came into direct contact with Islam in Spain, Sicily, and Palestine in the Middle Ages and in the Balkans during the Ottoman period. These encounters were all with Sunni Islam with the exception of limited contacts with Isma'ilism during the Crusades. In the colonial period India was the only large area in which a direct knowledge of Shi'ism was necessary for day-to-day dealings with Muslims. For this reason the few works in English dealing with Twelve-Imam Shi'ism are mostly connected with the Indian subcontinent.[13] As a result of this lack of familiarity many of the early Western orientalists brought the most fantastic charges against Shi'ism, such as that its views were forged by Jews disguised as Muslims. One of the reasons for this kind of attack, which can also be seen in the case of Sufism, is that this type of orientalist did not want to see in Islam any metaphysical or eschatological doctrines of an intellectual content, which would make of it something more than the famous "simple religion of the desert." Such writers therefore had to reject as spurious any metaphysical and spiritual doctrines found within the teachings of Shi'ism or Sufism. One or two works written during this period and dealing with Shi'ism were composed by missionaries who were particularly famous for their hatred of Islam.[14]

It is only during the last generation that a very limited number of Western scholars have sought to make a more serious study of Shi'ism. Chief among them are L. Massignon, who devoted a few major studies to early Arab Shi'ism, and H. Corbin, who has devoted a lifetime to the study of the whole of Shi'ism and its later intellectual development especially as centered in Persia, and who has made known to the Western world for the first time some of the metaphysical and theosophical richness of this as yet relatively unknown aspect of Islam.[15] Yet, despite the efforts of these and a few other scholars, much of Shi'ism remains to this day a closed book, and there has not appeared as yet an introductory work in English to present the whole of Shi'ism to one who is just beginning to delve into the subject.

The Present Book

It was to overcome this deficiency that in 1962 Professor Kenneth Morgan of Colgate University, who pursues the laudable goal of presenting Oriental religions to the West from the point of view of the authentic representatives of these religions, approached me with the suggestion that I supervise a series of three volumes dealing with Shi'ism and written from the Shi'ite point of view. Aware of the difficulty of such an undertaking, I accepted because of the realization of the importance which the completion of such a project might have upon the future of Islamic studies and even of comparative religion as a whole. The present work is the first in that series; the others will be a volume dealing with the Shi'ite view of the Quran, written also by 'Allamah[16] Tabataba'i, and an anthology of the sayings of the Shi'ite Imams.

During the summer of 1963 when Professor Morgan was in Tehran we visited 'Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i in Darakah, a small village by the mountains near Tehran, where the venerable Shi'ite authority was spending the summer months away from the heat of Qum where he usually resides. The meeting was dominated by the humble presence of a man who has devoted his whole life to the study of religion, in whom humility and the power of intellectual analysis are combined. As we walked back from the house through the winding and narrow roads of the village, which still belongs to a calm and peaceful traditional world not as yet perturbed by the sound and fury of modernism, Professor Morgan proposed that 'Allamah Tabataba'i write the general volume on Shi'ism in the series and also the volume on the Quran. Later I was able to gain the consent of this celebrated Shi'ite authority that he put aside his monumental Quranic commentary, al-Mizan, to devote some of his time to these volumes. Having studied for years with him in the fields of traditional philosophy and theosophy, I knew that of the traditional Shi'ite authorities he was the one most qualified to write such a work, a work which would be completely authentic from the Shi'ite point of view and at the same time based upon an intellectual foundation. I realized of course the innate difficulty of finding a person who would be a reputable religious authority, respected by the Shi'ite community and untainted by the influence of Western modes of thought, and at the same time well enough conversant with the Western world and the mentality of the Western reader to be able to address his arguments to them. Unfortunately, no ideal solution could be found to this problem, for in Persia, as elsewhere in the Muslim world, there are today usually two types of men concerned with religious questions: (1) the traditional authorities, who are as a rule completely unaware of the nature of the psychological and mental structure of modern man, or at best have a shallow knowledge of the modern world, and (2) the modernized so-called "intellectuals," whose attachment to Islam is often only sentimental and apologetic and who usually present a version of Islam which would not be acceptable to the traditional authorities or to the Muslim community(ummah) . Only during the past few years has a new class of scholars, still extremely small in number, come into being which is both orthodox and traditional in the profound sense of these terms and at the same time knows well the modern world and the language necessary to reach the intelligent Western reader.

In any case, since the aim of Professor Morgan was to have a description of Shi'ism by one of the respected traditional Shi'ite scholars, the ulama, it was necessary to turn to the first class, of which 'Allamah Tabataba'i is an eminent example. Of course one could not expect in such a case the deep understanding of the Western audience for whom the work is intended. Even his knowledge of Sunni Islam moves within the orbit of the traditional polemics between Sunnism and Shi'ism, which has been taken for granted until now by him as by so many other of the prominent ulama of both sides. There are several types of Muslim and in particular of Shi'ite ulama and among them some are not wellversed in theosophy and gnosis and limit themselves to the exoteric sciences. 'Allamah Tabataba'i represents that central and intellectually dominating class of Shi'ite ulama who have combined interest in jurisprudence and Quranic commentary with philosophy, theosophy, and Sufism and who represent a more universal interpretation of the Shi'ite point of view. Within the class of the traditional ulama, 'Allamah Tabataba'i possesses the distinction of being a master of both the Shari'ite and esoteric sciences and at the same time he is an outstanding hakim or traditional Islamic philosopher (or more exactly, "theosopher"). Hence he was asked to perform this important task despite all the difficulties inherent in the presentation of the polemical side of Shi'ism to a world that does not believe in the Islamic revelation to start with and for whom the intense love of Ali and his Household, held by the Shi'ites, simply does not exist. Certain explanations, therefore, are demanded that would not occur to a person writing and thinking solely within the Shi'ite world view.

Six years of collaboration with 'Allamah Tabataba'i and many journeys to Qum and even Mashhad, which he often visits in the summer, helped me to prepare the work gradually for translation into English-a task which requires a translation of meaning from one world to another, to a world that begins without the general background of knowledge and faith which the usual audience of 'Allamah Tabataba'i possesses. In editing the text so that it would make possible a thorough and profound under standing of the structure of Islam, I have sought to take into full consideration the differences existing between traditional and modern scholarship, and also the particular demands of the audience to which this work is addressed.[17] But putting aside the demands made by these two conditions, I have tried to remain as faithful to the original as possible so as to enable the non-Muslim reader to study not only the message but also the form and intellectual style of a traditional Muslim authority.

The reader must therefore always remember that the arguments presented in this book are not addressed by 'Allamah Tabataba'i to a mind that begins with doubt but to one that is grounded in certainty and is moreover immersed in the world of faith and religious dedication. The depth of the doubt and nihilism of certain types of modern man would be inconceivable to him. His arguments, therefore, may at times be difficult to grasp or unconvincing to some Western readers; they are only so, however, because he is addressing an audience whose demand for causality and whose conception of the levels of reality is not identical with that of the Western reader. Also there may be explanations in which too much is taken for granted, or repetitions which appear to insult the intelligence of the perspicacious Western reader in whom the analytical powers of the mind are usually more developed than among most Orientals.[18] In these cases, the characteristic manner of his presentation and the only world known to him, that of contemporary Islam in its traditional aspect, must be kept in mind. If the arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas for the proof of the existence of God do not appeal to most modern men, it is not because modern men are more intelligent than the medieval theologians, but because the medieval masters were addressing men of different mentalities with different needs for the explanation of causality. Likewise, 'Allamah Tabataba'i offers arguments addressed to the audience he knows, the traditional Muslim intelligentsia. If all of his arguments do not appeal to the Western reader, this should not be taken as proof of the contention that his conclusions are invalid.

To summarize, this book may be said to be the first general introduction to Shi'ism in modern times written by an outstanding contemporary Shi'ite authority. While meant for the larger world outside of Shi'ism, its arguments and methods of presentation are those of traditional Shi'ism, which he represents and of which he is a pillar. 'Allamah Tabataba'i has tried to present the traditional Shi'ite point of view as it is and as it has been believed in and practiced by generations of Shi'ites. He has sought to be faithful to Shi'ite views without regard for the possible reactions of the outside world and without brushing aside the particular features of Shi'ism that have been controversial. To transcend the polemical level, two religious schools would either have to put aside their differences in the face of a common danger, or the level of discourse would have to be shifted from the level of historical and theological facts and dogmas to purely metaphysical expositions. 'Allamah Tabataba'i has not taken either path but has remained content with describing Shi'ism as it is. He has sought to do full justice to the Shi'ite perspective in the light of the official position that he holds in the Shi'ite religious world as he is a master of both the exoteric(zahir) and the esoteric(batin) sciences. For those who know the Islamic world well it is easy to discern the outward difficulties that such an authority faces in expounding the total view of things and especially in exposing the esoteric doctrines which alone can claim true universality. He is seen in this book as the expositor and defender of Shi'ism in both its exoteric and esoteric aspects, to the extent that his position in the Shi'ite world has allowed him to speak openly of the esoteric teachings. But all that is uttered carries with it the voice of authority, which tradition alone provides. Behind the words of 'Allamah Tabataba'i stand fourteen centuries of Shi'ite Islam and the continuity and transmission of a sacred and rehigious knowledge made possible by the continuity of the Islamic tradition itself.

The Author

'Allamah Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i[19] was born in Tabriz in A.H. (lunar) 1321 or A.H. (solar) 1282, (A.D. 1903)[20] in a family of descendants of the Holy Prophet which for fourteen generations has produced outstanding Islamic scholars.[21] He received his earliest education in his native city, mastering the elements of Arabic and the religious sciences, and at about the age of twenty set out for the great Shi'ite University of Najaf to continue more advanced studies. Most students in the madrasahs follow the branch of "transmitted sciences"(al-'ulum al-naqliyah) , especially the sciences dealing with the Divine Law, fiqh or jurisprudence, and usul al-fiqh or the principles of jurisprudence. 'Allamah Tabataba'i, however, sought to master both branches of the traditional sciences: the transmitted and the intellectual. He studied Divine Law and the principles of jurisprudence with two of the great masters of that day, Mirza Muhammad Husayn Na'ini and Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Isfahani. He became such a master in this domain that had he kept completely to these fields he would have become one of the foremost mujtahids or authorities on Divine Law and would have been able to wield much political and social influence.

But such was not his destiny. He was more attracted to the intellectual sciences, and he studied assiduously the whole cycle of traditional mathematics with Sayyid Abu'l-Qasim Khwansari, and traditional Islamic philosophy, including the standard texts of the Shifa' of Ibn Sina, the Asfar of Sadr al-Din Shirazi and the Tamhid al-qawa'id of Ibn Turkah, with Sayyid Husayn Badkuba'i, himself a student of two of the most famous masters of the school of Tehran, Sayyid Abu'l-Hasan Jilwah and Aqa 'Ali Mudarris Zunuzi.[22]

In addition to formal learning, or what the traditional Muslim sources call "acquired science"('ilm-i husuli) , 'Allamah Taba- taba'i sought after that "immediate science"('ilm-i huduri) or gnosis through which knowledge turns into vision of the supernal realities. He was fortunate in finding a great master of Islamic gnosis, Mirza 'Ali Qadi, who initiated him into the Divine mysteries and guided him in his journey toward spiritual perfection. 'Allamah Tabataba'i once told me that before meeting Qadi he had studied the Fusus al-hikam of Ibn 'Arabi and thought that he knew it well. When he met this master of real spiritual authority he realized that he knew nothing. He also told me that when Mirza Ali Qadi began to teach the Fusus it was as if all the walls of the room were speaking of the reality of gnosis and participating in his exposition. Thanks to this master the years in Najaf became for 'Allamah Tabataba'i not only a period of intellectual attainment but also one of asceticism and spiritual practices, which enabled him to attain that state of spiritual realization often referred to as becoming divorced from the darkness of material limitations(tajrid) . He spent long periods in fasting and prayer and underwent a long interval during which he kept absolute silence. Today his presence carries with it the silence of perfect contemplation and concentration even when he is speaking.

'Allamah Tabataba'i returned to Tabriz in A.H. (solar) 1314 (A.D. 1934) and spent a few quiet years in that city teaching a small number of disciples, but he was as yet unknown to the religious circles of Persia at large. It was the devastating events of the Second World War and the Russian occupation of Persia that brought 'Allamah Tabataba'i from Tabriz to Qum in A.H. (solar) 1324 (A.D. 1945) Qum was then, and continues to be, the center of religious studies in Persia. In his quiet and unassuming manner 'Allamah Tabataba'i began to teach in this holy city, concentrating on Quranic commentary and traditional Islamic philosophy and theosophy, which had not been taught in Qum for many years.

His magnetic personality and spiritual presence soon attracted some of the most intelligent and competent of the students to him, and gradually he made the teachings of Mulla Sadra once again a cornerstone of the traditional curriculum. I still have a vivid memory of some of the sessions of his public lectures in one of the mosque-madrasahs of Qum where nearly four hundred students sat at his feet to absorb his wisdom.

The activities of 'Allamah Tabataba'i since he came to Qum have also included frequent visits to Tehran. After the Second World War, when Marxism was fashionable among some of the youth in Tehran, he was the only religious scholar who took the pains to study the philosophical basis of Communism and supply a response to dialectical materialism from the traditional point of view. The fruit of this effort was one of his major works, Usul-i falsafah wa rawish-i ri'alism (The Principles of Philosophy and the Method of Realism), in which he defended realism-in its traditional and medieval sense-against all dialectical philosophies. He also trained a number of disciples who belong to the community of Persians with a modern education.

Since his coming to Qum, 'Allamah Tabataba'i has been indefatigable in his efforts to convey the wisdom and intellectual message of Islam on three different levels: to a large number of traditional students in Qum, who are now scattered throughout Persia and other Shi'ite lands; to a more select group of students whom he has taught gnosis and Sufism in more intimate circles and who have usually met on Thursday evenings at his home or other private places; and also to a group of Persians with a modern education and occasionally non-Persians with whom he has met in Tehran. During the past ten or twelve years there have been regular sessions in Tehran attended by a select group of Persians, and in the fall season by Henry Corbin, sessions in which the most profound and pressing spiritual and intellectual problems have been discussed, and in which I have usually had the role of translator and interpreter. During these Years we have studied with 'Allamah Tabataba'i not only the classical texts of divine wisdom and gnosis but also a whole cycle of what might be called comparative gnosis, in which in each session the sacred texts of one of the major religions, containing mystical and gnostic teachings, such as the Tao Te-Ching, the Upanishads and the Gospel of John, were discussed and compared with Sufism and Islamic gnostic doctrines in general.

'Allamah Tabataba'i has therefore exercised a profound in- fluence in both the traditional and modern circles in Persia. He has tried to create a new intellectual elite among the modern educated classes who wish to be acquainted with Islamic intellectuality as well as with the modern world. Many among his traditional students who belong to the class of ulama have tried to follow his example in this important endeavor. Some of his students, such as Sayyid Jalal al-Din Ashtiyani of Mashhad University and Murtada Mutahhari of Tehran University, are themselves scholars of considerable reputation. 'Allamah Tabataba'i often speaks of others among his students who possess great spiritual qualities but do not manifest themselves outwardly.

In addition to a heavy program of teaching and guidance, 'Allamah Tabataba'i has occupied himself with writing many books and articles which attest to his remarkable intellectual powers and breadth of learning within the world of the traditional Islamic sciences.[23]

Today at his home in Qum the venerable authority devotes nearly all of his time to his Quranic commentary and the direction of some of his best students. He stands as a symbol of what is most permanent in the long tradition of Islamic scholarship and science, and his presence carries a fragrance which can only come from one who has tasted the fruit of Divine Knowledge. He exemplifies in his person the nobility, humility and quest after truth which have characterized the finest Muslim scholars over the ages. His knowledge and its exposition are a testimony to what real Islamic learning is, how profound and how metaphysical, and how different from so many of the shallow expositions of some of the orientalists or the distorted caricatures of so many Muslim modernists. Of course he does not have the awareness of the modern mentality and the nature of the modern world that might be desired, but that could hardly be expected in one whose life experience has been confined to the traditional circles in Persia and Iraq.

* * *

A word must be added about the system of transliteration of Arabic and Persian words and the manner in which reference is made to Islamic sources. In the question of transliteration I have followed the standard system used in most works on Islam (see the table on p. vii), but in making reference to Islamic books I have sought to remain completely faithful to the original manuscript. The author, like most other Persian writers, refers to the very well-known Arabic works in the Persian-speaking world in their Persian form and to the less well-known in the original Arabic. For example, the history of al-Tabari is referred to by the author as Tarikh-i Tabari, using the idafah construction in Persian, which gives the same meaning as the word "of" in English. This may appear somewhat disconcerting to one who knows Arabic but no Persian, but it conveys a feeling for the spiritual and religious climate of Persia where the two languages are used side by side. In any case such references by the author have been transliterated according to the original. I have only sought to make them uniform and to give enough indication in the bibliography to make clear which author and which work is in question.

In the bibliography also, only the works referred to by 'Allamah Tabataba'i as his sources have been included, and not any secondary or even other primary ones which I could have added myself. Also the entry in the bibliography is according to the name of the book and not the author, which has always been the method used in Islamic circles.

For technical reasons diacritical marks on Arabic words which have become common in English, and italics in the case of all Arabic words appearing in the text, have been employed only in the index and at the first appearance of the word. In the end I should like to thank Professor Kenneth Morgan, whose keen interest and commendable patience in this project has made its achievement possible, and Mr. William Chittick, who has helped me greatly in preparing the manuscript for publication.

Seyyed Hossein Nasr

Tehran

Rabi al-awwal, 1390

Urdibihisht, 1350

May, 1971

NOTES

1. See F. Schuon, Light on the Ancient Worlds, translated by Lord Northbourne, Londan, 1965, especially Ch. IX, "Religio Perennis."

2. See S. H. Nasr, Ideals and Realities of Islam, London, 1966, Ch. IV, "Sunnism and Shi'ism."

3. On walayat see S. H. Nasr, Ideals, pp. 161-l62, and the many writings of H. Corbin on Shi'ism, which nearly always turn to this major theme.

4. For a profound analysis and criticism of Ash'arite theology see F. Schuon, "Dilemmas of Theological Speculation," Studies in Comparative Religion, Spring, 1969, pp.66-93.

5. See S. H. Nasr. An Introduction to Islamic Cosmological Doctrines, Cambridge (U.S.A.), 1964, Introduction; also S. H. Nasr, Science and Civilization in Islam, Cambridge (U.S.A.). 1968, Chapter II.

6. This idea was first formulated in an as yet unpublished article of F. Schuon entitled "Images d'Islam," some elements of which can be found in the same author's Das Ewige im Vorganglichkeit, translated by T. Burckhardt, Weilheim/ Oberbayern, 1970, in the Chapter entitled "Blick auf den Islam," pp. 111-129.

7. This term is nearly impossible to translate into English, the closest to an equivalent being the word "grace." if we do not oppose grace to the naturol order as is done in most Christian theological texts. See S. H. Nasr, Three Muslim Sages, Cambridge (U.S.A.). 1964, pp.105-106.

8. See our study "Shi'ism and Sufism: Their Relationship in Essence and in History," Religious Studies, October 1970, pp.229-242; also in our Sufi Essays, Albany. 1972.

9. This position is especially defended by H. Corbin, who has devoted so many penetrating studies to Shi'ism.

10. See H. Corbin's introduction to Sayyid Haydar Amuli, La Philosophie Shi'ite, Tehran-Paris, 1969.

11. The only history of philosophy in Western languages which takes these elements into account is H. Corbin (with the collaboration of S. H. Nasr and O. Yahaya), Histoire de la philosophie islamique, vol.I, Paris, 1963.

12. This question has been treated with great lucidity in F. Schuon, Understanding Islam, translated by D. M. Matheson, London, 1963.

13. See for example J. N. Hollister, The Shi'a of India, London, 1953; A. A. A. Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law, London, 1887; and N. B. Baillie, A Digest of Moohummudan Law, London, 1887. Of course in Iraq also the British were faced with a mixed Sunni-Shi'ite population but perhaps because of the relatively small size of the country this contact never gave rise to serious scholarly concern with Shi'ite sources as it did in India.

14. We especially have in mind D. M. Donaldson's The Shi'ie Religion, London, 1933, which is still the standard work on Shi'ism in Western universities. Many of the works written on the Shi'ites in India are also by missionaries who were severely opposed to Islam.

15. Some of the works of Corbin dealing more directly with Twelve-Imam Shi'ism itself include: "Pour une morphologie de la spiritualite shi'ite," EranosJahrbuch, XXIX, 1960; "Le combat spirituel du shi'isme," Eranos-Jahrbuch, XXX, 1961; and "Au 'pays' de l'Imam cache, "Eranos-Jahrbuch, XXXII, 1963. Many of Corbin's writings on Shi'ism have been brought together in his forthcoming En Islam iranien.

16. 'Allamah is an honorific term in Arabic, Persian and other Islamic languages meaning "very learned."

17. For my own views on the relationships between Sunnism and Shi'ism see Ideals and Realities of Islam, Ch. VI.

18. On this important question of the difference between the Oriental and Western dialectic see F. Schuon, "La dialectique orientale et son enracinement dans la foi," Logique et Transcendence, Paris, 1970, pp. 129-169.

19. An account in Persian of 'Allamah Tabataba'i by one of his outstanding students, Sayyid Jalal al-Din Ashtiyani, can be found in Ma'arif-i islami, vol. V, 1347 (A. H. solar), pp. 48-50.

20. since the beginning of the reign of Reza Shah the Persians have been using even more than before the solar hegira calendar in addition to the lunar, the former for civil and daily purposes and the latter for religious functions. In the present work all Islamic dates are lunar unless otherwise specified.

21. The title "Sayyid" in 'Allamah Tabataba'i's name is itself an indication of his being a descendant of the Prophet. In Persia the term sayyid (or seyyed) is used exclusively in this sense while in the Arab world it is usually used as the equivalent of "gentleman" or "Mr."

22. On these figures see S. H. Nasr, "The School of Ispahan," "Sadr al-Din Shirazi" and "Sabziwari" in M. M. Sharif (ed), A History of Muslim Philosophy, vol. II, Wiesbaden, 1966.

23. See the bibliography for a complete list of the writings of 'Allamah Tabataba'i.