London Lectures

London Lectures37%

London Lectures Author:
Publisher: ABWA Publishing and Printing Center
Category: Imam Hussein

London Lectures
  • Start
  • Previous
  • 14 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 11209 / Download: 4431
Size Size Size
London Lectures

London Lectures

Author:
Publisher: ABWA Publishing and Printing Center
English

1

2

3

Lecture 8: The Word Muhammad in the Bible

This brief study seeks to answer the simple question of whether or not the Hebrew Bible refers to the word Muhammad, or more specifically to one of its Hebrew cognates, as a proper name. The usefulness of such a task is clear. If such a usage can be attested, the many descriptive passages that some scholars have appealed to in reference either to the prophet or the Mahdi of that name (upon whom be peace) gain in validity.

The larger problem set forth behind this study is whether the Bible contains material in reference to the figures of the prophet or the Mahdi (as) in Islamic thought. Obviously the Bible has been interpreted in specific ways by Jewish, Christian and other scholars in reference to the Messiah, Elijah, or another awaited prophet, and these traditional ways of applying the Scriptures may conflict with Islamic interpretations related to the prophet or Mahdi (as). This is especially likely to be the case, since many of the possible candidates are passages already understood in Messianic terms. Jewish and Christian understanding differs, sometimes applying a passage to the awaited Messiah on one hand and to Jesus (as) on the other. To attempt to bring a further figure into this complex adds to the confusion. It is therefore essential to approach the matter systematically.

The first step in approaching this problem ought not to be to propose such new interpretations of old and controversial texts. That task should be relegated to a later stage altogether. Rather, the first step is to note whether the names of the prophet and Mahdi are used in the Hebrew Scriptures in some cognate form, and whether these are associated with factors suggesting the Islamic figures as the terminus of such prophetic expressions. The second step is to examine the functions of the Mahdi in comparison with the body of Biblical Scripture in order to identify parallels. Obviously such parallels will be more convincing to the skeptic once a clear reference to a specific name can be produced.

Among the many names of the Prophet (as) and the Mahdi (as) is of course Muhammad. This is the name most likely to be evident in the Bible, and must therefore be examined first. On the other hand, this name is ambiguous, since it refers not only to the Mahdi (as), but to other Imams as well. It will thus be necessary in this study to find a Hebrew cognate, show that it is used as a specific name, and find factors that point directly to the prophet and the Mahdi (as). Unless this can be achieved, further examination of the Bible will be largely fruitless in regard to this subject. Without a demonstration that this name has significance among the prophecies of prophets to come and the end-time, functional descriptions, the application of texts already applied to other messianic figures, will continue to have little force outside Islam.

The Hebrew cognate of the root from which the name Muhammad is derived is hmd, which means “to desire, pamper.” The Arabic connotation of “to praise” is not found inmodern Hebrew. The noun form is a feminine with the common feminine suffix added. It is used twelve times in the Hebrew Scriptures, four of which appear in the construct. There is no problem with the use of this word as a masculine proper name, as there are many examples of seemingly feminine forms being included in a masculine name, and vice versa.

The first task is to establish whether or not this word is used as a proper name in the Hebrew Scriptures. We can immediately dispense with the occurrence of the word in the construct in Daniel 11:37, where it is translated “the desire” of women. It is clearly and unequivocally used as a proper name in Psalm 106:24. Yea, they despised the pleasant land, they believed not his word.

By leaving the word untranslated, we get the following rendering of the verse. Yea, they despised the land of Hamda, they believed not his word. The final half of the verse includes the possessive suffix “his,” which needs an antecedent. The nearest possible antecedent is the enigmatic Hamda. Unless this word is conceived as a masculine proper name, there is no natural antecedent for the possessive.The fact that Hamda is the only possible antecedent for the masculine possessive that follows shows that it must be seen as a masculine proper noun rather than a feminine common noun.

It remains to understand to whom this verse refers. Seen in terms of the Islamic concept of the Mahdi (as), the verse makes little sense. On the other hand, seen in terms of the prophet of Islam, Muhammad (as), it makes a good deal of sense. It can easily be understood as referring to the fact that when the prophet Muhammad (as) came, many people did not believe his word, because they despised his origins in Arabia. Of course the context of the verse is a reference to the Exodus, so the primary application of the name should normally be a person involved at that time. None can be found. Even if one could be found, the secondary application of the prophecy would clearly refer to the Prophet (as).

It is clear that the word Hamda is used at least once in the Hebrew Scriptures to refer to a human being, and that reference contains a significant parallel to the life of the prophet Muhammad (as). It remains to be seen whether there are other references to the word Hamda that can or must be seen as a proper name, and whether any of these refer either to the prophet Muhammad (as) or to Muhammad al-Mahdi (as).

There is an ambiguous reference to the death of Jehoram in 2 Chronicles 21:20 thatapplies the word Hamda to the king. 2 Chronicles 21:20 ‘Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings.’ The word Hamda is translated here as “desired.” This translation is slightly distorted, since the noun substantive is used without an adjectival positioning. However, the translation is certainly possible. If the word is meant to be a proper name, the relevance is great. The implication would be that at the time every king of Judah was evaluated as to whether he fitted the criteria of the awaited Hamda. The name itself suggests this awaiting, that the people knew that Hamda was coming and longed for or desired him. The king is buried with the nostalgic remark that he did not turn out to be Hamda. In this case there is no contextual evidence pointing out whether the prophet (as) or the Mahdi (as) is meant.

An occurrence of the word in the construct in the same sense, in reference to the anointing of Saul as king, is found in 1 Samuel 9:20. Here the king is called the desire or Hamda of Israel. The expression is put to Saul in a future sense, thus showing it to be in the context of a messianic hope.

Another appearance of the word comes in 2 Chronicles 32:27 ‘And Hezekiah had exceeding much riches and honour: and he made himself treasuries for silver, and for gold, and for precious stones, and for spices, and for shields, and for all manner of pleasant jewels.’

The translation of “pleasant” is a little forced here, but possible despiteits slightly enigmatic character. The translation of keley as “jewels” is rather interpretive, since the word has a broad range of meanings more clearly related to utensils and tools. Coming after “shields,” another translation would appear in order. It is possible that there was at the time an expression “instruments of Hamda” which had a meaning not now known, but referred to the awaited and desired one. That this is the case is suggested by the repetition of the expression in Jeremiah 25:34 Howl, ye shepherds, and cry, and wallow yourselves in the ashes, ye principal of the flock: for the days of your slaughter and of your dispersions are accomplished, and ye shall fall like a pleasant vessel.

The same expression appears, this time translated vessel instead of jewels. It could just as well be understood as “instruments of Hamda.” That this is a technical term the meaning of which has been lost is clouded by the fact that it is arbitrarily translated with a different expression nearly every time it occurs. A similar usage for the word in the construct, and in reference to the vessels of the temple, is found in 2 Chronicles 36:10. Another example is Nahum 2:9 ‘Takeye the spoil of silver, take the spoil of gold: for there is none end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant furniture.’ The exact word keley, which was “jewels” and “vessel” before, is arbitrarily ‘furniture’ here. There is finally a second verse in which the expression is translated ‘pleasant vessels.’ Hosea 13:15 Thou hebe fruitful among his brethren, an east wind shall come, the wind of the LORD shall come up from the wilderness, and his spring shall become dry, and his fountain shall be dried up: he shall spoil the treasure of all pleasant vessels.

The fact that fully half of the passages containing the term Hamda pair it with keley goes far toward confirming the theory that this is a lexicalized expression. Whatever ‘instruments of Hamda’ are, they make it clear that Hamda was a figure that was desired and awaited and had captured the minds of the populace to such an extent that the name appeared as an expression referring to some kind of instruments, whether the unlikely jewels or vessels or furniture of some kind, or something else, is meant.

Another idiom, less relevant to the present question, uses the plural of the word, hamdoth. It is translated several ways, but generally means ‘desired, precious, beloved.’ It appears in 2 Chronicles 20:25 with keley, referring perhaps to precious stones. Perhaps the use of the plural distinguishes it from the idiomatic expression in the singular examined above. It occurs with other words in Daniel 10:10,11,19 ; 11:43.

We have seen that one passage (Psalm 106:24) demands the interpretation of Hamda as a proper name. 2 Chronicles 21:20 permits the interpretation of Hamda as a proper name, but does not require it grammatically. It may require it semantically. If so, it and like references intimate a prophetic expectation attached to kings. The other passages suggest a technical term inspired by the hold this awaited one had on the popular imagination. The remaining two passages are in the same category as 2 Chronicles 21:20, which could be translated as a proper name or as a common noun, although their semantic weight falls on the side of a proper name as well.

The following text using the word Hamda is Jeremiah 3:19 ‘But I said, How shall I put thee among the children, and give thee the land of Hamda, a goodly heritage of the hosts of nations?and I said, Thou shalt call me, My father; and shalt not turn away from me.’

These words are addressed to the people of Judah. Because of their behavior, God asks how He can count them as sons and allow them to live in the land of Hamda. He answers that He can do so if they acknowledge Him as father and if they do not turn away from Him, that is, if they repent. The context is that of impending deportation, which does in fact take place, since the people do not repent. The figure of speech, sons and father, in relation to God implies a relationship of obedience, as a child to its father. This is the required relationship between God and humankind. Humankind is obliged to obey God or suffer the consequences. The Jews of the time, through failure to obey God, were deported to Babylon first and finally under protest from Jeremiah, to Egypt. Thus they lost the right to live in the land of Hamda and take their place among the sons of God, that is, those obedient to Him. The context makes it clear that the land of Hamda is the land promised to Abraham (as) and his descendants. The fact that the expression parallels that of Psalm 106:24 might lead us to consider this also to be a proper name, although the context here does not require it.

Does this text have any eschatological implications, that is, can it be applied to the figure of the Mahdi? The text clearly applies primarily to the time of the prophet Jeremiah (as). The reaction of Judah to Jeremiah’s prophecy was failure to repent with the result of deportation. The final portion of the text seems to indicate that the Jews would respond by repenting, which we see that they did not do at the time of Jeremiah. There is therefore every reason to give the text an eschatological application. Applied in an eschatological way, the implication is that the Jews are given a chance to repent and thus take their place among the nations who are obedient to God. This is consonant with the eschatological hope and the figure of the Mahdi, who should fill the earth with justice. In this sense, the land of Hamda must be the whole earth to be inhabited by those who respond with repentance to the call of the Mahdi (as), here referred to by his primary name of Muhammad or Hamda.

The reference to the land of Hamda has an eschatological application here. This means that we mayjustified in attributing an eschatological application to Psalm 106:24 as well, since the expression is the same. Psalm 106:24, which is the vital text to show that Hamda is a personal masculine name in the Hebrew Scriptures, ought then to have a dual application, that is, to both the prophet Muhammad (as) and the Mahdi (as).

The land of Hamda is also mentioned in Zechariah 7:14 ‘But I scattered them with a whirlwind among all the nations whom they knew not. Thus the land was desolate afterthem, that no man passed through nor returned: for they had laid desolate the land of Hamda.’

This text seems to refer to the diaspora of the Jews among all nations. The last half of the text is enigmatic and suggestive. The first desolation of the land is the desolation of having lost its population. That no man passed through nor returned refers specifically that no Jews were living or traveling there. The last clause is introduced with the Hebrew copula we-, but the authorized translator interprets it correctly as an explanatory attachment, giving the cause of what went before. The Jews had not laid any physical land desolate. ‘Laying the land of Hamda desolate’ must be understood in a figurative sense. To give a literal sense to this clause would be redundancy on the level of saying that water is wet because it is wet.

The expression ‘land of Hamda’ is used three times in Scripture, which is a great proportion of the whole corpus. It has almost as great a claim to lexicalization as the expression “instruments of Hamda.” But its meaning is far clearer.Several levels of meaning appear. The bottom layer is a reference to the land promised to Abraham (as) in Genesis 12:1-3. The promise that in Abraham (as) all families of the earth should be blessed already at the beginning takes on an eschatological perspective that has not gone unnoticed by non-Muslim scholars. The ‘land of Hamda’ is the heritage of Abraham (as) in its eschatological sense. Laying the land of Hamda desolate implies spoiling the covenant ofAbraham, that is, basically introducing injustice. The prophets are clear in their denouncing of Israel for injustice to the weak, and this is one of the foundations for the exile. This is repeated for the diaspora, as prophesied by Zechariah (as).

All of this affirms the application of the expression ‘land of Hamda’ in an eschatological sense and by the same token to the figure of the Mahdi (as).

In sum, all of the texts are potentially examples of the use of the word Hamda as a masculine personal name. One of these, Psalm 106:24, requires this interpretation, and the others, within their context, are best understood by appeal to this usage. Thus the Biblical usage of this word can be seen to be uniform and consistent. Psalm 106:24 is also unique in that it must be applied primarily to the prophet Muhammad (as). Its eschatological implications are dependent on the lexicalization of the expression ‘land of Hamda.’ A dual application may be seen in all of the other texts as well, although most of them show a clear reference toeschatology, and by implication the possibility of perceiving in them a reference to the Mahdi (as).

There is an occurrence of the word Hamda in the construct in Haggai 2:7ff ‘And I will shake all nations, and the Hamda of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the LORD of hosts. The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the LORD of hosts. The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts: and in this place will I give Islam [shalom], saith the LORD of hosts.’

This particular usage, with the construct, speaks against interpreting the word Hamda in this case as a proper name. However, the text is late, and the lexicalized expressions might have become so ingrained that the proper name had become synonymous with an awaited figure. Perhaps a middle ground translation of the term would best express the meaning of the text: ‘the desired one of all nations.’ The reconstructed temple did not last to see a messianic figure at all. It was desecrated, reconsecrated, and renovated beyond recognition by Herod.So neither Jesus (as) nor Muhammad the prophet (as) could fulfill literally the first promise. A literal fulfillment would have to be sought in the Maccabean period.Given the vocabulary, the night ascent of Muhammad (as) is as good a fulfillment of this prophecy as any history has to offer. The translation of shalom as Islam rather than the generalized term “peace” is predicated on the tone of the sentence, which is specific. The grace of a particular event is implied.

There is a single occurrence of an interesting form of the word including the participial prefix as in Arabic, and what appears to be a plural suffix in form. This is mahamadim in Song of Solomon 5:16. This cannot be a plural, however, since the referent is clearly stated to be masculine singular in the preceding words. Song of Solomon 5:16 ‘His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely (Hebrew: Mahamadim). This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.’

At this point it may seem surprising to what extent these texts actually express details in the ministries of the prophet Muhammad (as) and the Mahdi (as). However detailed these references may be, an examination of the texts referring not to the primary name, but to other epithets and their surrounding ideas, is likely to show an array of detail of convincing proportions, especially considering that the word Hamda is used as a proper name with eschatological connotations.

Lecture 9: The Word ‘Ali in the Bible

The wordcali is used 226 times in the Hebrew scriptures. The following study examines all of these occurrences at least briefly. The Massoretic text of the Hebrew Bible is the source, but I have ignored the Massoretic pointing of the wordcali , rather examining each context for clues to which pointing and consequently which meaning of the word is to be preferred.

Most of the time the wordcali is a preposition, either with or without the first person singular pronominal suffix. The first occurrence with the pronominal suffix is in Genesis 20:9 Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him,What hast thou done unto us?and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin?thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done. The following texts, the great preponderance of passages including the wordcali , seem to have the same meaning, that is, “upon me” or something similar. Genesis 27:12; 13; 30:28; 33:13; 34:12; 34:30; 42:36; 48:7; 50:20, Numbers 11:11; 14:35; 22:30; Judges 7:2; 19:20; 20:5; 1 Samuel 17:35; 21:15; 22:8,13; 23:21; 2 Samuel 1:9; 3:8; 14:9; 15:33; 19:38; 1 Kings 2:4; 14:2; 22:8,18; 2 Kings 16:7; 18:14; 1 Chronicles 22:8; 2 Chronicles 18:7; 18:17; 36:23; Ezra 1:2; 7:28; Nehemiah 2:8; 2:18; 6:12; 13:22; Esther 4:16; Job 7:12; 7:20; 9:11; 10:1; 13:13,26; 16:9,10,13,14,15; 19:5,6; 19:11; 19:12; 21:27; 29:13; 30:1,12,15,16; 31:38; 33:10; Psalm 3:1(2); 3:6(7); 13:2(3); 13:6(7); 16:6; 17:9; 22:13; 27:2,3; 31:13; 32:4,5; 35:15; 35:21; 35:16,26; 38:2(3); 38:16(17); 40:7,12; 41:7; 41:9(10); 41:11; 42:4(5); 42:5(6); 42:7(8); 42:11(12); 43:5; 54:3(5); 55:3(4); 55:4(5); 55:12(13); 56:5(6); 59:3(4); 60:8; 69:9(10); 69:15(16); 86:14; 88:7(8); 88:16(17); 88:17(18); 92:11(12); 109:2; 109:5; 116:12; 119:69; 139:5; 142:7(8); 143:4; Proverbs 7:14; Ecclesiastes 2:17; Song of Solomon 2:4; Isaiah 1:14; 61:1; Jeremiah 8:18; 11:19; 12:8,11; 15:16; 18:23; 49:11; Lamentations 1:15; 3:5,20,61,62; Ezekiel 3:22; 8:1; 11:5; 35:13; 37:1; 40:1; Daniel 4:34; 4:36; 7:28; 10:8; 10:16; Hosea 7:13; Hosea 11:8; Joel 3(4):4; Jonah 2:3(4); 2:7(8); and Malachi 3:13.

The first occurrence of the word as a preposition without suffix is in Genesis 49:17, which is a poetic passage. Indeed, the form is typical of poetic style. Genesis 49:17 Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in thepath, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward. Similarly the word appears to be used as a simple preposition without suffix in Genesis 49:22; Deuteronomy 32:2; Job 6:5; 8:9; 9:26; 15:27; 18:10; 20:4; 29:3,4; 30:4; 33:15; 36:28; 38:24; 41:30; Psalm 49:11; 50:5,16; 92:3(4); 94:20; 108:9(10); 131:2; 142:3(4); Proverbs 8:2; 30:19; Isaiah 18:4; Lamentations 4:5; and Micah 5:(6)7.

In 1 Samuel 1-4 is found the story of the house of Eli. The name is also mentioned in 1 Samuel 14:3; 1 Kings 2:27;This proper name of the high priest and judge of Israel before Samuel is written cAli. The pointing with the long e merely reflects the more complex vowel system of Hebrew as compared to Arabic. Arabic cognates witha appear in Hebrew with either a or e, and often preferably e. The segholate character of Hebrew thus clouds the fact that the name is precisely the same as the Arabic c Ali. There are some striking parallels as well as direct contrasts between the Biblical Eli and ImamcAli (as). The firstcAli had two unrighteous sons who led the people into disaster. The second one had two sons who became righteous leaders. There is a parallel between the two figures from a historical perspective as well. The Samaritans claim that Eli caused the rift between Samaritans and Jews by his false claim to the priesthood. The division between Shi’ite and Sunnite Islam surrounds the claims of the figure of ImamcAli (as).

The first clear passage in which the word must be translated as the imperative singular of the verb “to go up” is in 1 Samuel 25:35 So David received of her hand that which she had brought him, and said unto her, Go up in peace to thine house; see, I have hearkened to thy voice, and have accepted thy person. Similarly the word occurs in Isaiah 21:2; 40:9; Jeremiah 22:20; and 46:11.

The word appears with the meaning of “leaves of” in Nehemiah 8:15 And that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying, Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and pine branches, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written.

The first text that requires reevaluation is Exodus8: (5)9.

And Moses said unto Pharaoh, Glory over me: when shall I intreat for thee, and for thy servants, and for thy people, to destroy the frogs from thee and thyhouses, that they may remain in the river only?

It is not likely that anyone would pretend that the phrase “glory over me” makes any sense at all. The assumption of the translator is that the word here is the preposition with the pronominal suffix, which is of course the dominant usage of the word in the Torah, especially in the prose passages. There seems to be no questioning of the preposition and suffix themselves, while the hesitancy about how to understand the verb placed with the preposition and suffix is of longstanding debate, going back to the Septuagint (LXX) underlying the Vulgata expression constitue mihi, appoint me (a time). Reference to the Masoretic text has led most translators to reject the Septuagint and Vulgata alternative for something presumably based on the Hebrew text, whether or not it makes sense.

Those translators requiring meaning in their translation have tended to read an unwarranted expression into the Hebrew in the sense of “do me the honor to...” an interpretation that goes back at least to Luther. Wavering between sense and nonsense is illustrated by the Webster original, which was “Glory over me” and the revised Webster which is “Command me,” apparently accepting the LXX over the Masoretic text. In sum, three alternatives are to be found in the more commonly known translations. The first follows the LXX-Vulgata tradition. The second tries to make sense of the Hebrew Massoretic text by attributing unattested meanings to the preceding verb. The third translates the Massoretic verb correctly, producing nonsense in the wordcali by insisting that it is a preposition with suffix.

An alternative is to accept the Massoretic verb as it stands and attribute a non-prepositional meaning to the word cly. The choices are one of the verb forms “to rise,” or one of the proper or common noun meanings. The position requires the latter, rather than the imperative verb. The choices are thus basically “glorify my leaf,” “glorify a pestle or pistil” or “glorifycAli .” The common nouns do not make sense, and the second meaning is not even attested in Scriptural Hebrew. An Arab will immediately suggest a reference to the Deity, as “exalted.” This word, however, in the Hebrew text, would consist inan Arabicism . We are thus left with the enigmatic “glorify cAli,” in reference to an unknown named figure, or reference to God under the term, something that appears to be more or less without precedent in Biblical Hebrew. The reflexive sense of the verb could be thought to imply the necessity of a preposition before the object. However, the lack of the preposition is almost the rule in poetic passages, and is not lacking in the Torah as well. Thus these two alternatives are otherwise perfectly feasible.

The rest of the texts must be examined in the light to two questions. The first is whether or not the word should be translated as one of the common alternatives noted above (as a preposition, a preposition with the suffix, the verb imperative, or as “leaves of” or “pestle.”). Once these meanings are eliminated, we are left with the alternatives of Exodus8: (5)9. The second task is to determine whether the text refers to Imam Ali (as) or some other figure.

There is nothing in Exodus8: (5)9 to indicate whether a human or divine figure is meant. The Muslim reader will immediately doubt whether the word is an epithet of God, since it is generally used so in the holy Qur’an. The translators of the Bible, however, have generally neglected that possibility, probably from hesitance to imposean Arabicism on the Biblical Hebrew text rather than bias. We can only hope to answer the question by an examination of all of the texts. Failing that, recourse to extra-biblical sources will be necessary

Such texts as Numbers 11:13 and 14:27 could conceivably be translatedcAli as well as a form of interjection, something on the order of “ya Ali!” Numbers 11:13Whence should I have flesh to give unto all this people?for they weep unto me, saying, Give us flesh, that we may eat.

Numbers 14:27 How long (shall I bear with) this evil congregation, which murmur against me? I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel, which they murmur against me. The second occurrence, however, in Numbers 14:27 can only be translated as in the Authorized Version. Even without this evidence, however, the structure of the sentences makes the authorized translation preferable.

The structure of Numbers 14:29 is neutral, and would actually as such allow the translation withcAli as easily as “against me.” The witness of verse 27, however, speaks againstcAli as the better alternative. Numbers 14:29Your carcases shall fall in this wilderness; and all that were numbered of you, according to your whole number, from twenty years old and upward, which have murmured against me.

Numbers 21:17 is the second text that translators have been willing to leave in a form void of meaning, in the figure of the flying well. It is doubly troublesome in lacking an explanatory context.

Numbers 21:17 Then Israel sang this song,Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it. The authorized translator writes words more appropriate to Alice in Wonderland than to scriptural translation. Most others do little better. Douay, Darby, The Jewish Publication Society Bible, The Twenty-first Century King James, Green’s Literal Translation, The Modern King James Version, The New King James Version, la Bible nouvelle edition de Geneve, the Webster and most other are satisfied with this interpretation. The Bible in Basic English tries to avoid the problem of the flying well by replacing it with the obedient well that comes when called: Then Israel gave voice to this song: Come up, O water-spring, let us make a song to it. Other translators have recognized the problem and tried to make sense of it by referring to the springing up of the water from a fountain. Among these are Finnish translation of 1938, the Swedish translation of 1917, and la nuova Diodati 1991. These are roughly “surge out, o well!” English translators are willing to depend on the ambiguity of the word “spring” in English. A few translators assume a preposition between the verb and the noun, thus making the noun the direction of movement rather than the vocative. This relieves us of the rather forced speech to a well. Among these are the redivierte Schlachter Bibel 1951 Da sang Israel dieses Lied: «Kommt zum Brunnen! Singt von ihm! It is rare to find help from the LXX in this dilemma, but perhaps Luther’s original is such an example Da sang Israel dieses Lied, und sangen umeinander über dem Brunnen. The translators in the revision of Luther have succumbed to the general fascination with nonsense. Even the Vulgata is surprisingly interpretive with the LXX with tunc cecinit Israhelcarmen istud ascendat puteus concinebant. Young makes a novel contribution by rejecting the Masoretic pointing of the word, thus changing it from an imperative to the preposition.(Young’s literal translation. Then singeth Israel this song, concerning the well--they have answered to it. In so doing, Young is the only translator to write a grammatically sensible translation. However, by doing so, he suppresses the song itself, thus raising the issue of what “this” can possibly refer to. In sum, almost every possible configuration has been tried. The implication is that no translator actually knows what the verse means.

There is a construction that is completely normal and understandable in Hebrew, wherebycAli is the subject and the well the predicate: cAli is a well. It is not clear, however, to whom this proper name refers.

It is possible, but not necessary, to translatecAli as a proper name in Numbers 24:6.

The Authorized Version isAs the valleys are they spread forth, as gardens by the river's side, as the trees of lign aloes which the LORD hath planted, and as cedar trees beside the waters. All translators seem to accept the interpretation “by the river.” Furthermore, it parallels what follows, “beside the waters.” Semantically and syntactically there seems to be no better alternative. If one understandscAli as a proper name here, the translation might read (following the Authorized Version otherwise): Ali is like the valleys that spread forth, like gardens, a river: as the trees... No linguistic arguments favour this interpretation. However, its position so close to Numbers 21:17, the similar references to water (well, river), and the further consideration that almost the entire book of Numbers contemplates the question of leadership authority, are factors that speak in favour of cAli as a proper name in this text also.

Deuteronomy 17:14 also deserves attention. The Authorised Version has this as When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me... The significant phrase is “a king over me” orcAli melekh. IfcAli were an epithet (exalted), it should come after the word “king” rather than before it. As it stands, it could be translated “I will set cAli king like all the peoples that are around me.”

This implies that the personage ofcAli is king of all the peoples around. The Authorised Version also has hermeneutical problems. The actual narrative relative to the establishment of kingship in Israel is found in 1 Samuel, and is clearly ill-advised. It requires the establishment of the unacceptable monarchy of Saul as a bridge to the acceptable dynasty of David (as). The critical study of Deuteronomy would date it as a later text, in which case there would be no problem. As it stands, the acceptability (with reservations) of the monarchy in Deuteronomy conflicts with the policy of Samuel. Probably the verse should stand as interpreted by the Authorised Version, whatever the hermeneutical problems may be.

In 1 Chronicles 28:19 there is an occurrence of the word that could well be translated as an epithet. The Authorised Version has this asAll (this, said David,) the LORD made me understand in writing by his hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern. The relevant phrase is “miyyadh YHWH cAli.” The translator has rearranged the words in translation probably because he does not, on the basis of philological reasons, accept the possibility of understandingcAli as an epithet. A Qur’anic translator would have thought of this alternative first and perhaps have ignored the other altogether, but would at the same time lay himself open to charges of Arabicism. Many translators have noticed the awkwardness of including “upon me” in the text, and have merely disregarded it, as does the American Standard Version: All this, (said David,) have I been made to understand in writing from the hand of Jehovah, even all the works of this pattern. Others reinterpret it as a preposition with an eliptical object as does the Revised Standard Version All this he made clear by the writing from the hand of the LORD concerning it, all the work to be done according to the plan. In the lattercAli is translated with some imagination as “concerning it.”

The more straightforward translation would be “The whole in writing from the hand of YHWH cAli made clear...” This could be understood as “He made clear the whole in writing by the hand of YHWH cAli.” The interpretation “cAli made clear the whole in writing by the hand of YHWH” ignores Hebrew syntax.cAli must therefore refer to God in this text. The concrete meanings of the words should probably give way to their more abstract meanings, thus “The whole by decree from the authority of YHWH cAli made clear...” If this is an acceptable interpretation, it would provide a Hebrew precedent for the use of the word as an epithet, the exalted, as in Arabic.

A strange syntactical configuration is one found in Nehemiah 5:7. The Authorised Version has this asThen I consulted with myself, and I rebuked the nobles, and the rulers, and said unto them, Ye exact usury, every one of his brother. And I set a great assembly against them. The relevant phrase is “with myself” which seems to translate libbicali . The full phrase is “my heart reigned cali. The word is syntactically in the position of a prepositional phrase. This is the only occurrence of the expression in the Scriptures, and it may well not mean “I consulted with myself.” It would seem more likely to suggest that his heart, the seat of his cogitations, reigned over him, thus influencing him to act as follows. In any case no reference to a proper name can be inferred.

Much of the Book of Job is ambiguous, but the wordcali appears in such a context only once, in Job 29:7. The Authorised Version has itWhen I went out to the gate through the city, when I prepared my seat in the street! No translators seem to see real alternatives to this interpretation. Several Spanish translations disregard the prepositional meaning and read “judicial” or something similar forcali . Another adjectival alternative might be “leafy,” but neither of these is relevant to the proper name Ali.

Psalm 7:8(9) has an interesting case. The Authorized Version renders this The LORD shall judge the people: judge me, O LORD, according to my righteousness, and according to mine integrity (that is) in me. There is no reason whatsover to add “that is” to the text. The final word is just as clearly a vocative as is the word YHWH at the pausal midpoint of the verse. The two words parallel each other. In this case the word Ali most readily relates to God, and is thus possibly a second precedent for the epithet. On the other hand, there is no reason to prohibit addressing a human figure in the second clause, that is, appealing to Ali as judge.

An interesting expression appears in Psalm 42:6(7). This is rendered in the Authorised Version as O myGod, my soul is cast down within me: therefore will I remember thee from the land of Jordan, and of the Hermonites, from the hill Mizar. The relevant phrase iscali nafshi. There are several cases when the preposition occurs before a noun with the same suffix, and these are merely circumlocutions expressing possession. The same structure appears here. However, it appears ambiguously, sincecali appears between Elohay and nafshi, and could stand as easily with one as the other. The expression could be interpreted as “my God exalted.” In this casecali would be an epithet referring to God, either as a proper name or as an attribute, but again an Arabicism unrecognized by Biblical scholars.

Another case of possible reference to God may be seen in Psalm 56:12(13). The Authorised Version gives Thy vows (are) upon me, O God: I will render praises unto thee. A more straightforward interpretation would render both words at the beginning as vocatives, thuscAli Elohim. This interpretation would require the third word, “thy vows,” to go with the rest of the sentence. The midpoint pausal does not exclude that possibility. The translation would then read “O exaltedGod, (by) thy vows will I render praises unto thee.” Again, this would require the acceptance ofan Arabicism .

Psalm 57:2(3) presents another possibility of a vocative parallel. The Authorised Version gives I will cry unto God most high; unto God that performeth (all things) for me. Here again the Qur’anic translator would immediately see two parallel epithets after the word El. Many verses of the Qur’an terminate in precisely this way. Thus we should read “I will cry unto God most high; unto God Accomplisher, Exalted.” This is especially interesting, since it uses the expanded word from the same root as Ali, celyon. This form of the word Ali is the one generally used in Hebrew in reference to God.

Psalm 86:13 is ambiguous, and could be translated in either of two ways. The Authorized Version givesFor great (is) thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell. The alternative would be “For great (is) thy mercy, O cAli...” In this case the name again would refer again to God.

There is a final verse in Ezekiel 3:14 where the word could just as well be translated as an epithet of God. The Authorised Version givesSo the spirit lifted me up, and took me away, and I went in bitterness, in the heat of my spirit; but the hand of the LORD was strong upon me. The alternative translation would be “...the hand of the LORD exalted was strong.”

The texts examined may be placed in several groups. The first includes cases of ambiguity which do not contribute toward finding the wordcAli used as a proper name or epithet. The second includes cases of ambiguity in which the wordcAli could just as well be translated as a proper name or epithet, but in which cases the translators have never chosen to do so. The third group includes cases of ambiguity in which the wordcAli could best be translated as a proper name or epithet, but in which cases the translators have sought awkward alternatives, often adding words not found in the original.

The texts remain troublesome. There are texts that can clearly best be translated as referring to a proper name or epithet. These suggest that others, ambiguous ones, might also best be interpreted in this way. As we examine these to determine whether the name Ali (or the Hebrew segholate form Eli) is meant, we see that some of these, if they are interpreted as epithets or proper nouns, must refer to God. In that case, an Arabicism produces a parallel term to the common Hebrew term Elyon.

Nevertheless, there are two considerations to note. The first is that several of the ambiguous names, notably those in the Torah, associate the namecAli with a source of water. This brings to mind Qur’anic associations, specifically the pool of Kauthar and the role given tocAli (as) in that regard. While it is not possible to state that the wordcAli in the Hebrew Scriptures is used in a prophetic sense in regard to cAli (as), there are passages that seem to be evocative of that. They are ambiguous, and perhaps refer to God, but the possibility remains that they are faint intimations, or perhaps more than faint intimations of a promised figure to come.

The second consideration is that non-Muslim Biblical scholars have not taken note of the fact that the epithetcAli as applied to God in the Qur’an has striking parallels in the Hebrew Scriptures, not only in the Psalms but in several other passages. This failure is only to be expected, since it requires the acceptance ofan Arabicism . The positive result of this study is to show that the Hebrew Scriptures and the holy Qur’an are perhaps closer to each other in expression than has generally been acknowledged. In any case, either the acceptance of the term as meaning “exalted” on one hand, or as a proper name on the other, seems to be the best way of accommodating those texts of Scripture that until now have been glossed over with translations having little or no meaning. Either solution brings the Bible closer into accord with Islam.

His Distinctions and Characteristics

Lineage

He is Ali son of Musa son of Ja’far son of Muhammad son of Ali son of al-Husayn son of Ali son of Abu Talib (a.s.), eighth in the series of the Imams belonging to the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.). His birthplace is Medina, and his resting place is Toos (Iran).

Birth and Demise

Historians disagree a great deal about the year of his birth and even in determining the month as well, and they also disagree about determining the year and the month of his death. Their disagreements are not confined to the limit of a short span of time but they may be five years apart, and the disagreement is so confusing that it is very difficult to determine clearly such matters; however, we shall point out the statements recorded in this regard without favoring any of them due to the lack of purpose of such favoring which naturally requires research and investigation and a proof for selecting what seems to be the most accurate.

He was born in Medina on Friday, or Thursday, Dhul-Hijja 11, or Dhul-Qi'da, or Rabi'ul-Awwal, of the Hijri year 148 or the year 153. He died on Friday, or Monday, near the end of the month of Safar, or the 17th of Safar, or Ramadan 21, or Jumada I 18, or Dhul-Qi'da 23, or the end of Dhul-Qi'da, of the year 202 or 203 or 206. In his'Uyoon Akhbar ar-Ridha’ , al-Saduq states: "What is accurate is that he died on the 13th of Ramadan, on a Friday, in the year 203."

What is most likely is that his death took place in the year 203 as stated by al-Saduq. It is the same year in which al-Ma’mun marched towards Iraq. To say that he died in 206 is not to agree with the truth because al-Ma’mun marched towards Baghdad in the year 204, and the Imam died while he was heading in the same direction.

His Mother

There is a great deal of dispute regarding the name of his mother. Some say she was called al-Khayzaran; others say she was Arwi and that her nickname was "the blonde of Nubia," while others say she was Najma and her nickname was "Ummul-Baneen." Others say she was called Sekan the Nubian; still others say she was called Takattam as may be proven from the poetry in his praise which said:

The best in self and parenthood,

In offspring and in ancestry,

Is Ali al-Muaddam,

Eighth in series of the knowledgeable

and the clement,

An Imam descending from the Proof of God,

that is Takattam.

Offspring

Disputes exist also regarding the number of his offspring and their names. A group of scholars say that they were five sons and one daughter,

and that they were: Muhammad al-Qani', al-Hasan, Ja’far, Ibrahim, al-Husayn, and 'Ayesha.

Sabt ibn al-Jawzi, in his workTadhkiratul-Khawass , says that the sons were only four, dropping the name of Husayn from the list. Al-Mufid inclines to believe that the Imam did not have any son other than Imam Muhammad al-Jawad (a.s.), and Ibn Shahr Ashoob emphatically states so, and so does al-Tibrisi in hisA'lam al-Wara. Al-'Udad al-Qawiyya states that he had two sons, Muhammad and Musa, and that he did not have any other offspring. In his claim, he is supported byQurb al-Asnad in which the author says that al-Bazanti asked ar-Ridha’, "For years I have been asking you who your successor is and you keep telling me that it is your son even when you had no son at all, but since God has now blessed you with two sons, which one of them is he?"'Uyoon Akhbar ar-Ridha’ indicates that he had a daughter named Fatima.

We are not in the process of investigating, researching and pinpointing with accuracy the number of his offspring and their names, but what seems to be more reasonable is what al-Mufid states. What is established as a fact with us is that Imam Muhammad al-Jawad (a.s.) was his son; as regarding his other sons, nobody seems to be able to prove any facts regarding them, and God knows best.

Personality and Characteristics

Generally speaking, an Imam enjoys a unique personality and distinctive characteristics, in as far as Shi'a followers of the Imams are concerned; therefore, he is not permitted to do what others are, such as falling into error, or getting confused about a matter. Rather, infallibility is essential in him since he conveys on behalf of the Prophet (S) what seems to others to be obscure of the Message and its intricacies.

Just as we proved the infallibility of the Prophet (S), we, by the same token, prove infallibility for the Imam as well with one exception: the Imam conveys on behalf of the Prophet (S), whereas the Prophet conveys on behalf of the Almighty God. The wisdom in this argument is that should falling into error be accepted and expected from the Prophet (S) or the Imam, then doubt will result regarding the reliability of what they convey to people of juristic rules and regulations and other such matters since they are liable to err in their judgment or get confused about a particular issue.

Although the believers are not held accountable for doing what they are not supposed to be doing due to such error of judgment, the assumption of the error of judgment itself collides with the very wisdom behind the reason why prophets were sent to people at all which is to clarify to people, according to the way God Almighty intended them to, without any error or confusion, what His Will is.

The topic of infallibility is a vast one the discussion of which has no room here and which requires a dedicated research I may be able one day to tackle. What I have to clarify here is that Imamate is characterized by certain distinctive aspects such as infallibility which we cannot discuss by itself with others except after both parties agree on the basis from which it emerged; otherwise, our case would be like one who discusses the necessity

of performing the ritual prayers (salat) with someone who does not believe in the message of the Prophet (S).

The basic point upon which we have first and foremost to agree is the definition of general Imamate, then the distinctions it requires and, finally, the proofs which testify to these distinctions. It is only then that disagreeing parties can conduct a reasonable discussion. Having been convinced by unequivocal proofs of such infallibility, and having seen the Twelve Imams (a.s.) to be fully qualified to be the only ones in whom such infallibility could be observed, we became fully convinced of their unshakable superiority over all others, and that they were the ones adorned with absolute human perfection.

An Imam, according to this viewpoint, has got to be the most learned among people and the most aware of the general needs of people such as knowledge or other necessities of life, and that he has to be the most pious, the most ascetic, the most perfect in personal conduct and norms of behavior. In other words, in order to be qualified for Imamate, one has to be superior to everyone else in all aspects of perfection and its requirements which all raise him to his position of leadership. On this basis, the character of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), who is one of these Twelve Imams, becomes clearly distinctive due to its merits. But this is not the limit of the scope of this research; rather, we shall attempt to research his personality and the qualities which distinguished him from all others by our sifting into the legacy history has preserved for us of his conduct while still alive, and from the stances taken by the men of knowledge and by contemporary caliphs towards him.

Government's Attitude Towards the Imam

The attitude of the then rulers towards Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) and the other Imams may provide us with a clear view of the distinctions which raised their personalities to the zenith. And it is essential to explain the phenomenon of the government's attitude towards them which manifested itself in the surveillance imposed upon them rather than upon other distinguished dignitaries or chiefs of the Alawides, monitoring their movements and counting their steps in all their social and personal encounters. What we can mention here to explain this phenomenon are the following reasons:

1) The belief of a large number of Muslims in their Imamate and in their being the most worthy of the caliphate, and their conviction that all other caliphs are considered usurpers of authority, trespassers upon the rights ordained by God to others. This is why the politicians of the time considered them their competitors whose mere presence increased the dangers surrounding them and jeopardized the security of the very existence of their government structure.

2) Their being the magnet which attracted leading scholars and thinkers who shrank in their presence despite their intellectual advancement and distinction in the fields of the arts and knowledge and despite their genius and intellectual prowess. This caused the caliphs to feel a stronger animosity towards them and be more grudgeful towards them due to the public

fascination by them and to their attempts to be close to them and to being emotionally distant from the center of the government.

3) Their being the better alternative from the public's political standpoint to take charge of the responsibilities of government, bear its burdens, carry out its obligations and doing all of that most efficiently. This frightened the rulers and made the obscure future seem to their eyes even more so.

4) The vicious incitements about them by their opponents who bore animosity towards them and who wished thereby their elimination, and the tell-tales of even some of their own kin whose judgment was blinded by jealousy, so they kept fabricating stories and attributing them to those Imams and telling them to the rulers who were pleased to hear them since they became outlets to the grudge they felt towards those Imams and, at the same time, found in them the pretexts for annihilating and harassing them and in the end a justification to put an end to their lives and rid themselves of the complex they were suffering from due to their existence.

By these and by others can we explain the phenomenon of the rulers pursuing them and desperately trying to alienate them from the stage of events affecting the nation in order to secure a distance from the ghost of competition which could haunt them had they permitted the Imams to do as they pleased. Thus can we understand the general characteristics of the significant distinctions the personalities of those Imams enjoyed in all sectors of the society in its various centers of activity and in its various aspirations; otherwise, how do you explain this phenomenon, and why should those rulers pay the Imams so much attention?

His Knowledge

He inherited the knowledge of his grandfather the Messenger of God (S), thus becoming its pioneering fountainhead that quenched the thirst of those who were thirsty for knowledge. History narrates a great deal of his scholarly stances and intellectual discourses in which he achieved victory over those who opposed the Divine Message, excelling in various branches of scholarship with which he provided the seekers of knowledge and the thinkers of the time.

Imam Musa a-Kazim (a.s.) is reported to have often said to his sons: "Ali ibn Musa, your brother, is the learned scholar of the Descendants of Muhammad (S); therefore, you may ask him about your religion, and memorize what he tells you for I have heard my father Ja’far ibn Muhammad more than once saying, `The learned scholar of the family of Muhammad is in your loins. How I wish I had met him, for he is named after the Commander of the Faithful Ali (a.s.).'"

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is reported to have said: "I never saw ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) unable to provide the answer to any question he received, nor have I ever seen any contemporary of his more learned than he was. Al-Ma’mun used to put him to test by asking him about almost everything, and he always provided him with the answer, and his answer and example was always derived from the Holy Qur'an."

Rajaa ibn Abul-Dahhak, who was commissioned by al-Ma’mun to escort ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to his court, said: "By God! I never saw anyone more pious than him nor more often remembering God at all times nor more fearful of

God, the Exalted. People approached him whenever they knew he was present in their area, asking him questions regarding their faith and its aspects, and he would answer them and narrate a great deal ofhadith from his father who quoted his forefathers till Ali (a.s.) who quoted the Messenger of God (S). When I arrived at al-Ma’mun's court, the latter asked me about his behavior during the trip and I told him what I observed about him during the night and during the day, while riding and while halting; so, he said: `Yes, O son of al-Dahhak! This is the best man on the face of earth, the most learned, and the most pious.'"1 .

Al-Hakim is quoted inTarikh Nishapur as saying that the Imam (a.s.) used to issue religious verdicts when he was a little more then twenty years old. In Ibn Maja's Sunan, in the chapter on "Summary Of Cultivating Perfection," he is described as "the master of Banu Hashim, and al-Ma’mun used to hold him in high esteem and surround him with utmost respect, and he even made him his successor and secured the oath of allegiance for him."

Al-Ma’mun said this once in response to Banu Hashim: "As regarding your reaction to the selection by al-Ma’mun of Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) as his successor, be reminded that al-Ma’mun did not make such a selection except upon being fully aware of its implications, knowing that there is no one on the face of earth who is more distinguished, more virtuous, more pious, more ascetic, more acceptable to the elite as well as to the commoners, or more God-fearing, than he (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) is."2 .

Abul-Salt al-Harawi is quoted saying: "I never saw anyone more knowledgeable than Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). Every scholar who met him admitted the same. Al-Ma’mun gathered once a large number of theologians, jurists and orators and he (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) surpassed each and every one of them in his own respective branch of knowledge, so much so that the loser admitted his loss and the superiority of the winner over him."3 .

He is also quoted saying: "I have heard Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) saying, `I used to take my place at the theological center and the number of the learned scholars at Medina was quite large, yet when a question over-taxed the mind of one of those scholars, he and the rest would point at me, and they would send me their queries, and I would answer them all."4 .

In his discourse regarding the issue of succession, al-Ma’mun said: "I do not know any man on the face of earth who is more suited (to be heir to the throne) than this man."5 .

Al-Manaqib records the following: "When people disputed regarding Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), Muhammad ibn 'Isa al-Yaqtini said, `I have collected as many as eighteen thousand of his answers to questions put forth to him.' A group of critics, including Abu Bakr the orator in hisTarikh and al-Tha'labi in histafsir and al-Sam'ani in his dissertation and in al-Mu'tazz in his work, in addition to others, have all quotedhadith from him."6 .

After an intellectual discourse with al-Ma’mun, Ali ibn al-Jahm said: "Al-Ma’mun stood up to perform the prayers ritual and took Muhammad ibn Ja’far, who was present there, by the hand, and I followed both of them. He asked him: `What do you think of your nephew?' He answered, `A learned scholar although we never saw him being tutored by any learned man.' Al-Ma’mun said: `This nephew of yours is a member of the family of the

Prophet (S) about whom the Prophet (S) said: `The virtuous among my descendants and the elite among my progeny are the most thoughtful when young, the most learned when adult; therefore, do not teach them for they are more learned than you are, nor will they ever take you out of guidance, nor lead you into misguidance.'"7 .

Ibn al-Athir writes: "He (al-Ma’mun) discerned the descendants of Banu al-Abbas and Banu Ali and did not find anyone more than him (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) in accomplishments, piety and knowledge."8 .

We do not need the testimony of anyone to convince us of the distinction enjoyed by Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) due to his knowledge over all others. Suffices us to review the books ofhadith which are filled with his statements and dictation in various arts which every individual, regardless of the loftiness of his degree of knowledge, became dwarfed upon meeting him, feeling his inferiority and the superiority of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.).

Ethical and Humane Conduct

Good manners constitute a significant part of one's personality. They unveil the innermost nature of the individual, highlighting the extent of its purity of origin when it translates belief into action. The Imam was characterized by a most noble personality which won him the love of the commoners as well as the elite, by extraordinary humanity derived from the spirit of the Message itself one of whose custodians he himself was, a person who safeguarded it and inherited its innermost secrets.

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is quoted saying: "I never saw Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) angering anyone by something he said, nor did I ever see him interrupting anyone, nor refusing to do someone a favor he was able to do, nor did he ever stretch his legs before an audience, nor leaned upon something while his companion did not, nor did he ever call any of his servants or attendants a bad name, nor did I ever see him spit or burst into laughter; rather, his laughter was just a smile. When he was ready to eat and he sat to be served, he seated with him all his attendants, including the doorman and the groom." He adds, "Do not, therefore, believe anyone who claims that he saw someone else enjoying such accomplishments."9 .

A guest once kept entertaining him part of the night when the lamp started fading and the guest stretched his hand to fix it, but Abul-Hasan (a.s.) swiftly checked him and fixed it himself, saying, "We are folks who do not let their guest tend on them."10 .

Al-Manaqib states that ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) once went to the public bath-house and someone asked him to give him a massage, so he kept giving the man a massage till someone recognized him and told that person who that dignitary was. The man felt extremely embarrassed; he apologized to the Imam (a.s.) and gave him a massage.11 .

Muhammad ibn al-Fadl narrates the following anecdote regarding the Imam's simple personality. He says:

"Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), on the occasion of Eidul-Fitr, said to one of his attendants, `May God accept your good deeds and ours,' then he stood up and left. On the occasion of Eidul-Adha, he said to the same man, `May God accept our good deeds and yours.' I asked him, `O son of the Messenger of God! You said something to this man on the occasion of Eidul-Fitr and

something else on the occasion of Eidul-Adha; why?' He answered: `I pleaded God to accept his good deeds and ours because his action was similar to mine and I combined it with mine in my plea, whereas I pleaded God to accept our good deeds and his because we are capable of offering the ceremonial sacrifice while he is not; so, our action is different from his.'"12 .

Thus does Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) become in total harmony with his message in the area of ethics, personifying the latter into action derived from the spirit of the message whereby he ascends to the summit of human perfection, rising thereby to the shores of the individual's own real greatness. It is through this and similar means that the sincerity of faith and loftiness and dignity of the self are recognized.

Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) defines for us the Islamic theory as the rules which govern the actual dealings of man with his brother man from which we can achieve the inspiration that Islam abolishes the then class distinctions among individuals and groups in the areas of public rights and the safeguarding of man's dignity, and that the difference which we must recognize regarding these areas is the difference between one who obeys God and one who does not.

A man once said to the Imam: "By God! There is nobody on the face of earth who is more honorable than your forefathers." The Imam responded by saying: "Their piety secured their honor, and their obedience of God made them fortunate."13 .

Another man said to him: "By God! You are the best of all people!" He said to him: "Do not swear so. Better than me is one who is more obedient to God and more pious. By God! The following verse was never abrogated: `And We have made you nations and tribes so that you may know each other; verily the best of you in God's sight is the most pious.'"14 .

Abul-Salt once asked him: "O son of the Messenger of God! What do you say about something people have been criticizing you for?" He asked: "What is it?" He said: "They claim that you call people your slaves." He said: "God! Creator of the heavens and the earth, Knower of the hidden and the manifest! I invoke Thee to testify that I have never said so, nor did I ever hear that any of my forefathers had said so! God! You are the Knower of the many injustices this nation has committed against us, and this is just one of them..." Then he came to Abul-Salt and said: "O Abdul-Salam! If all people, as some claim, are our slaves, who did we buy them from?" Abul-Salt answered: "You are right, O son of the Messenger of God..." Then the Imam said: "O Abdul-Salam! Do you deny the right which God has allotted for us to be charged with the authority as others deny?" He said: "God forbid! I do acknowledge such right."15 .

The Imam here denies such an allegation about him and his forefathers and rejects the vicious accusation which their enemies use against him to tarnish his image, considering it one of the many injustices committed against the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.). Rather, he and the Household of the Prophet (S) consider people to be equal in their general obligations except in the right of government which God ordained to be theirs solely, for others have no right to claim it for themselves. With the exception of the right to obey God in its most pristine implications which raised their status in the sight of

God and man, all are the slaves of God. They share the same parents and worship the same God.

Abdullah ibn al-Salt quotes a man from Balkh saying: "I accompanied ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) during his trip to Khurasan. One day he ordered preparations for his meal to which he invited all his attendants, blacks and non-blacks, so I said: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Maybe these should have a separate eating arrangement.' He said: `God Almighty is One; the father (Adam) and the mother (Eve) are the same, and people are rewarded according to their deeds.'"16 .

The Imam does not see any difference between him and his servants and attendants except in the degree of good deeds; other than that, all distinctions are void when the matter is related to common obligations in which all individuals are equal, for each one of them is created by the same God, and each has the same father, Adam, who was created of dust.

When we see the Imam sitting at the table surrounded by his servants, his doorman, and his groom, he is thus teaching the nation a lesson in virtuous humanity which believes in the dignity of man in order to demonstrate the theory of Islam in practice showing the nature of behavior man should undertake in his conduct towards his brother man. The loftiness of status and the elevation of career must not necessitate that a man of a less status or one whose career is less coveted should be despised or made to feel inferior to his brother man even if he is a servant.

This is so in order to eliminate the complex class distinctions which widen the gap between the members of the society whose energies would then be split into opposing parties torn by grudge and consumed by hatred.

Islam enacted the law of equality among the members of the society in the areas of general obligations in order to emancipate man's dignity from class obligations which dominated the way of life during the pre-Islamic era and were adopted by nations of old. God Almighty has said: "The best of you in the eyes of God is the one who is most pious."17 The Prophet (S) said: "All of you descended from Adam, and Adam was created of dust." He also said: "No Arab can be held superior to a non-Arab except through superiority of his degree of piety."

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is quoted saying: "I heard Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ saying, `I swear by emancipation--and whenever I swore by it, I would emancipate one of my slaves till I emancipated each and every one of them--that I do not see myself as better than that (and he pointed to a black slave of his who remained in his service) on account of my kinship to the Messenger of God (S) except if I do a good deed which would render me better.'"18 .

Thus does the Imam define for us the good Islamic conduct of safeguarding the dignity of man and the elimination of all class distinctions except the distinction of good deeds. He, peace be upon him, does not view his kinship to the Prophet (S) as providing him with a distinction over a black slave except if such kinship is combined with good deeds which render the doer distinction and superiority. Yasir, one of his servants, said once: "Abul-Hasan said to us once: `If I leave the table before you do, while you are still eating, do not leave on my account till you are through.' It may

happen that he calls upon some of us to his service and he is told that they are eating, whereupon he says: `Leave them to finish their meal first.'" Nadir, another servant, says: "Abul-Hasan did not require us to do anything for him except if we had finished eating our meal."19 .

These are samples of his actual conduct and humanity which he inherited as a fragrant legacy the perfume of which is goodness and mercy from his grandfather the greatest Prophet (S) who crowned his message with the banner of good conduct when he said: "I have been sent to perfect the code of good conduct." Such was that genuine humane legacy from whose spirit nations derive their strength and upon which they build the pillars of their glory and through which they secure the continuation of their very existence.

His Conduct Regarding His Appearance

There is no doubt that, generally speaking, the Imams (a.s.) were more distant than anyone else from the alluring wares of this vanishing world, and most distant from its ornamentations and allurements. But the concept of asceticism according to them was not limited to wearing modest coarse clothes or eating very simple food. Rather, its limits extended beyond that, for the ascetic person is the one who does not allow the pleasures of this world to take control over him without being able to take control of them, one who does not see this world as the ultimate goal he seeks; rather, when it comes towards him, the believer is entitled to enjoy its good things, and when it forsakes him, he contends himself that God's rewards are more lasting.

Al-Aabi is quoted inNathr al-Durar as saying:

"A group of sufis visited ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) when he was in Khurasan, and they said to him, `The commander of the faithful looked into the authority God Almighty entrusted to him, and he found you, members of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), to be the most deserving of all people to be the leaders.

Then he discerned you, members of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), and he found yourself the most worthy of leading the people, so he decided to entrust such leadership to you. The nation is in need of one who wears coarse clothes, eats the most simple food, rides the donkey and visits the sick.' Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was first leaning, then he adjusted the way he was sitting and said: `Joseph (Yousuf) was a Prophet who used to wear silk mantles brocaded with gold. He sat on the thrones of the Pharaohs and ruled.

An Imam is required to be just and fair; when he says something, he says the truth, and when he passes a judgment, he judges equitably, and when he promises something, he fulfills his promise. God did not forbid (an Imam) from wearing a particular type of clothes or eating a particular type of food.' Then he recited the Qur'anic verse: `Say: Who has forbidden the beautiful (gifts) of God which He has produced for His servants, and the good things, clean and pure (which He has provided) for sustenance?'"20 .

Imam al-Jawad (a.s.) was asked once about his view regarding musk. He answered: "My father ordered musk to be made for him in a ben tree in the amount of seven hundred dirhams. Al-Fadl ibn Sahl wrote him saying that people criticized him for that. He wrote back: `O Fadl! Have you not come

to know that Joseph (Yousuf), who was a Prophet, used to wear silk clothes brocaded with gold, and that he used to sit on gilded thrones, and that all of that did not decrease any of his wisdom?' Then he ordered a galia moschata (perfume of musk and ambergris) to be made for him in the amount of four thousand dirhams.'"21 .

Thus does the Imam prove that the outward appearance of asceticism has nothing to do with true asceticism; rather, it may even be a fake whereby someone tries to attract the attention of others. This is why Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) and other Imams did not see anything wrong with meeting the public with an appearance of luxury in what they put on or ate as long as it did not collide with the reality of asceticism which is the building of the self from within to renounce the world and its allurement and regard it as a vanishing display with a short span of life.

This does not forbid the believer from enjoying its pleasures in the way which God made permissible. God did not create the good things in this world for the disbeliever to enjoy while depriving the believers there from. Rather, God considers the believer to be more worthy of such enjoyment when he submits himself to God and expends it in His Path.

Ibn Abbas tells us the following about Imam ar-Ridha’'s ascetic conduct: "Ar-Ridha’ used to sit on a leaf mat during the summer and on a straw sack during the winter; he used to put on coarse clothes, but when he went out to meet the public, he put on his very best."22 So, when he is by himself, away from public life, his soul finds harmony with denying what is fake, that is, the decorations and allurements of this life. But when he goes out to meet people, he puts on his best for them following their own nature of holding the appearances of this world as significant, enjoying its good things. This realistically ascetic conduct of the Imam provides us with a glorious example of the truth regarding the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.) and their pure view of life which is free from any disturbing fake or pretense.

Clemency and Tolerance

Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) had recommended his son ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to be the Imam after him, making him his own deputy in faring with his wealth, women, sons and the mothers of his sons, without permitting any of his other sons to fare with anything after him, and he wrote his will indicating so and sealed it with his own seal, invoking the Wrath of God upon anyone who would unlawfully break the seal after having secured the testimony of a number of his own household and followers. But the brothers of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) disputed with their brother regarding their father's will and what he had left for them. According to al-Kafi, Yazid ibn Salit is quoted saying:

"Abu Umran al-Talhi was the judge at Medina when his (ar-Ridha’'s) brothers presented him as their opponent in their dispute. Al-Abbas ibn Musa said: `May God bring through you reconciliation and happiness. At the bottom of this written statement there is a treasure and a jewel and he (ar-Ridha’) wishes to keep it away from us and take it all to himself, and our father entrusted everything to him, leaving us helpless. Had I not checked myself, I would have told you so before a crowd of people.' Ibrahim ibn Muhammad, who was one of the witnesses of the will, jumped at him and

said: `Then you by God would be telling something we do not accept to be coming even from you, and we will hold you as a liar, and you will be among us blamed and despised, nicknamed by the young and the old as a liar.

Your father knew you best if there was any good in you and your father knew you inside and out, and he could not trust you to guard two pieces of dates.' Then his uncle Ishaq ibn Ja’far jumped at him and pulled him by the robe saying, `You are a silly, weakling, and a fool; add these to your previous faults,' and he was supported in his view by all others. Abu Umran, the judge, said to Ali, `Stand up, O father of al-Hasan! Suffices me today the curse your father had invoked, and your father was quite generous with you.

No! By God! Nobody knows a son better than his father. No! By God! Your father was neither weak in his intellect nor shallow in his view.' Al-Abbas said to the judge, `May God bring conciliation through you! Please remove the seal and read the contents.' Abu Umran said, `No, I shall not remove it; suffices me today the curse your father invoked.' Al-Abbas said, `I shall remove it.' He said, `That is up to you.' So al-Abbas removed the seal and the contents spelled out their exclusion and the inclusion only of Ali, and an order that they all, whether they liked it or not, were to listen to and obey Imam Ali ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). In short, the removal of the seal spelled their destruction, scandal and humiliation, whereas Ali remained the winner.

"Ali then turned to al-Abbas and said: `Brother! I know that what made you do what you did is the fact that you have fines and debts to pay. Sa'id! Go ahead and take an account of their debts, then pay their dues on their own behalf. After that take out their zakat and clear their name. By God! I shall never abandon your assistance and I shall never cut my ties from you as long as I walk on this earth; so, you may say whatever you please.'

"Al-Abbas said: `Do not give us anything other than what rightfully belongs to us, and what you hold of our own is even more.' He said: `You may say anything you want to say, for the offer is yours; if you do good deeds, you shall be rewarded by God, and if you commit a bad deed, God is Most Forgiving, Merciful. By God! You know very well that today I have no son nor heir except you; so, if I keep anything which belongs to you from you or save what you think to belong to you, it shall always remain yours and will always be returned to you. By God! I have never owned anything since your father, may God be pleased with him, passed away except that I relinquished it to you as you have seen.'

"Al-Abbas leaped and said: `By God it is not so! Nor God has given you authority over us..., but..., but it is our father's jealousy and he willed a will which God does not accept from him nor from you, and you know very well that I know Safwan ibn Yahya, the Sabiri seller at Kufa. If I ever get there, I shall strangle him and you with him.'

"Ali said: `There is no power or will except by the Will of God, the Sublime, the Great... Brothers! God knows that I desire nothing other than your happiness and well-being. God! If you know that I love their well-being, and that I want nothing but good for them, that I do not severe my ties with them, that I am kind to them, concerned about their affairs day and night..., then grant me good rewards for it. But if I am contrariwise, then I

invoke You, Knower of the unknown, to grant me the rewards of my intentions: good for good and evil for evil. Lord! Bring them to the path of righteousness, and make life good for them, and keep the snares of the devil away from us and from them, and assist them to be able to worship Thee, and help them see Thy guidance. As for me, brother, I desire nothing other than your happiness, working hard for your own well-being, and God is my Witness.'

"To this, al-Abbas said: `How well I know your mastery over words! And there is no mud with me for your spade!'"23 .

With these rude words al-Abbas ended his argument with his brother, Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), despite the fact that the Imam was very kind and clement in his argument with him, without articulating any unkind word, that it was already established that right was on the side of the Imam, and that their own transgression dragged him into such a situation which did not befit his lofty status. This, indeed, is indicative of a great deal of clemency and tolerance towards an unlimited aggression.

Although al-Abbas discarded the norms of good manners in his confrontation with his brother by articulating disrespectful words and by committing a sin against his own father Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) by accusing him of being jealous and biased, which causes the other party to be on the offensive, or at least would push him away from a balanced temper, this is not an artificial show of clemency and tolerance from the Imam (a.s.); rather, it is derived from the spirit of genuine goodness and love whereby he and the other Imams were characterized when others challenged them.

On the other hand, the Imam (a.s.) tries to cause others to adorn themselves with the same trait of clemency and tolerance upon being wronged as an element of good relationship among them, justifying this by saying that it increases the dignity of man, for clemency and tolerance, when the ability to deal equal blows and effect equal retribution express the power of anger in man and his control over his rash temper upon being challenged, this causes others to respect and venerate such a person especially when that person shoulders the responsibilities of authority. Al-Aabi says:

"A man sentenced to be beheaded was brought to al-Ma’mun while ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was among his train. Al-Ma’mun asked him: `Father of al-Hasan! What is your view?' He said: `All I can say is that God only increases the dignity of those whose good will causes them to forgive.' He, therefore, forgave the man."24

Swiftness of Response

Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was endowed with a readiness to respond coupled with the strength of argument and oratory to which extra-ordinary expressions freely submitted without making the over-all meaning too difficult to comprehend. His arguments with the heads of other religions, with foremost writers, and with atheists in which he outwitted them with his clear argument and decisive arguments, all provide us with a glorious indication that he used to enjoy the ability to provide a ready answer and a speed in intellectual reasoning.

This is why learned scholars held him in high esteem and hesitated to challenge him to debate in any field of knowledge as actually happened after

his arguments with the highest authorities of other religions at a meeting al-Ma’mun arranged at his court and the audience were tongue-tied when he challenged them to put for discussion whatever came to their minds.

His Patience and Perseverance

The patience and perseverance of the Imam manifest themselves clearly when he had to face psychological and emotional crises. When he went to say his farewell at the Ka'ba, Mecca, upon being ordered by al-Ma’mun to be present at his court in Khurasan, he was faced with an emotional situation involving his only son Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Jawad, but he maintained with an iron will his self-control, solacing himself with a patient heart, submitting to God's Will and Decree.

Umayya ibn Ali states: "I was sitting with Abul-Hasan (a.s.) at Mecca during the year in which he performed thehajj prior to his trip to Khurasan, and Abu Ja’far was with him when he was bidding the House (Ka'ba) good-bye. Having finished his tawaf, he went to the maqam and said his prayers there. Abu Ja’far, accompanied by Muaffaq, was making his tawaf, till he reached the Stone. There he sat and he prolonged his sitting there. Muaffaq said to him: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! It is time you stood up.'

He answered: `I do not wish to leave this place at all except by the Will of God,' and grief could easily be seen clouding over his face. Muaffaq approached Abul-Hasan and said to him: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Abu Ja’far is sitting by the Stone unwilling to leave,' so Abul-Hasan stood up, came to Abu Ja’far and said: `Stand up, my loved one.' But his son said: `I do not wish to leave this place...' He said: `Do stand up, O my loved one.' After a while, he said to his father: `How can I stand up seeing that you have already said your farewell at the House never to return again?' He said: `Do stand up, my loved one.' He stood up and left with his father."

The Imam (a.s.) patiently put up with numerous norms of persecution and injustice inflicted upon him during the reign of (Harun) al-Rashid starting with the tragedy of his father, passing by the tragedies to which the Alawides were subjected, and ending with the unfair instigations to al-Rashid by the Imam's opponents to kill him and eliminate him.

The strength of the patience and perseverance of the Imam become manifest when we examine the thinly veiled political persecution from which he suffered during al-Ma’mun's reign especially after the latter appointed him as his heir to the throne, fully knowing that al-Ma’mun was not sincere in his intention but rather enacted a political act in which al-Ma’mun played the major role solely to provide security to the shaky foundations of his regime due to the storming events the outcome of which was reflected upon the issue of who would succeed him on the throne.

The extent of the suffering of the Imam, the degree of his bitterness and agony, and the amount of grief and sorrow which filled his heart due to the treatment meted to him by the government, can be assessed; yet he buried all of that in the depth of his mind with mute patience and perseverance. Yasir, his servant, said once: "Whenever ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) returned home on Friday from the mosque, with his face sweating and stained by blowing dust, he would raise his hands and invoke God saying, `God! If the only

way I am relieved from my distress is by death, then I invoke Thee to hasten its hour.'"

Suffices to assess the extent of his patience and perseverance to simply be aware of the fact that although he was God's Argument over His creation, he was powerless to do anything while seeing right being abandoned and wrong upheld.

Generosity

In a dialogue with al-Bazanti, the Imam said: "Anyone who receives a boon is in danger: He has to carry out God's commandments in its regard. By God! Whenever God blesses me with something, I continue to be in extreme apprehension till (and here he made a motion with his hand) I take out some of it and spend it in the way God has ordained in its regard." Al-Bazanti asked him: "May my life be sacrificed for yours! You, in your status of high esteem, fear that much?" He answered: "Yes, indeed! And I praise my Creator for the blessings He bestowed upon me."25 .

The Imam's generosity and thoughtfulness emanate out of this good aspect of his conviction which depends on the principle of letting others share in the wealth with which God blesses him, and in what blessings and favors He bestows upon him. God's rights in this context are the shares of the needy and the poor in this world whose ability to earn a decent living was hampered by either severe employment conditions, or disability to work due to old age, or because of being left stranded away from their original home, in addition to others who were forced by the necessities of life to stretch their hands to others for help.

To ask others is humiliating, for it shatters the dignity of the person who is stretching his hand asking and by his psychological appeal to the breath of humanity in the person he is asking. In this story, the Imam guides us to realize a magnificent fact about the human psychology, that is, to give is not a favor someone does to someone else begging him for help; rather, it is his way of thanking God for the blessings with which He blessed him. The person who is blessed is in danger until he takes out of it the rights in it which are God's.

The Imam's method in giving is derived from such an angle of the human nature. Eleisha ibn Hamza says: "I was once talking to ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) when a large crowd of people assembled to ask him about what is permissible in Islam and what is not. A man as tall as Adam came to him and said: `Assalamo Alaikom, O Son of the Messenger of God! I am a man who loves you, your fathers and grandfathers, and I have just been on my way to perform the pilgrimage when I discovered that I had lost everything with me and now I do not have anything enough even for a leg of the trip. If you will, please help me with the expense of going back home, and I am a recipient of God's blessing (i.e. well to do).

As soon as I reach there, I will give to the poor as much as you will give me, for I do not qualify to be a recipient of alms.' He said to him: `Sit, may God be merciful to you,' then he kept talking to people till they dispersed except that man, Sulaiman al-Ja’fari, Khuthai'ama and myself. Then he (ar-Ridha’) said: `Do you permit me to enter (the room)?' Sulaiman said to him: `May God advance your endeavor.'26 So he entered the room and stayed for

about an hour after which he came out and closed the door behind him, stretched his hand above the door and said: `Where is the man from Khurasan?' The man answered: `Here I am!' He said: `Take these two hundred dinars, use them for your preparations for the trip; may God bring you blessings thereby, and do not spend an equal amount to it on my behalf, and leave the room in a way that I do not see you and you do not see me,' then he left.

Sulaiman then said: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! You have made quite a generous offer, but why did you hide your face?' He answered: `I did so for fear of seeing the humiliation on the face of the man due to my assistance for him. Have you not heard thehadith of the Messenger of God (S) in which he said: `The one who hides a good deeds receives rewards equal to performing the pilgrimage seventy times; one who announces his sin is humiliated, while one who hides it is forgiven'? Have you heard the saying of the example of the first case: Whenever I approach him, one day, with a plea, I return home and my dignity is still with me. For he hides himself from the person who appeals to him when he gives him something so that he does not see the humiliation on his face, and so that the pleading person retains his dignity when he does not see the face of the benevolent one who is giving him?"

He asks him to leave without seeing him in order to safeguard himself against feeling as having the upper hand over the pleading person, and in order to relieve the pleading person from having to show his gratitude to him.

While in Khurasan, he once distributed his entire wealth to the poor on the day of Arafat, so al-Fadl ibn Sahl said to him: "Now you are bankrupt!" he said: "On the contrary! I am now wealthier than ever. Do not consider trading my wealth for God's rewards and pleasure as bankruptcy."27 .

He does not give others in order to buy their affection or friendship; rather, he considers giving with generosity as a good trait whereby man gets nearer to his Maker by including His servants in the wealth with which He blessed him. This is the difference between his method of giving and the method of others. Ya'qub ibn Ishaq al-Nawbakhti is quoted saying:

"A man passed by Abul-Hasan and begged him to give him according to the extent of his kindness. He said: `I cannot afford that.' So he said: `Then give me according to mine,' whereupon he ordered his servant to give the man two hundred dinars."28 .

The reason why the Imam abstained from giving the man according to the extent of his own kindness, as the man asked him the first time, is probably due to the fact that he simply did not have as much money as he liked to give. As regarding his own affection towards the poor and the indigent, and his way of looking after them, Mu'ammar ibn Khallad narrates this anecdote:

"Whenever Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was about to eat his meal, he would bring a large platter and select the choicest food on the table and put on it, then he would order it to be given away to the poor. After that he would recite the following verse: `But he hath made no haste on the path that is steep.'29 After that he would say: `God, the Exalted and the Sublime,

knows that not everyone has the ability to free a slave, nevertheless He found means for them to achieve Paradise (by feeding others).'"30 .

Thus does the Imam sense the weight of deprivation under which the poor moan and suffer; therefore, he shares his best food with them in response to the call of humanity and kindness and in harmony with the spirit of the message with which God entrusted him.

Al-Bazanti tells the story of a letter Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) wrote to his son Imam Abu Ja’far (a.s.) which personifies the generosity and spirit of giving deeply rooted in the hearts of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.); he says: "I read the letter of Abul-Hasan Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to Abu Ja’far which said: `O Abu Ja’far! I have heard that when you ride, the servants take you out of the city through its small gate.

This is due to their being miser so that nobody asks you for something. I plead you by the right I have upon you that every time you enter into or get out of the city, you should do so through its large gate, and when you ride, take gold and silver with you, and every time you are asked, you should give. If any of your uncles asks you for something, you should give him no less than fifty dinars, and you yourself may determine the maximum amount you would like to give; and if any of your aunts asks you for something, do not give her less than twenty-five dinars, and it is up to you to determine the maximum amount. I only desire that God raises your status; therefore, keep giving away and do not fear that the Lord of the Throne will ever throw you into poverty.'"31

Equity

The Imam (a.s.) did not have the chance to rule for any period of time so that we may discuss his practical style of government, but we can still be acquainted with that through reviewing his statements to some of his followers who very much desired that the Imam should shoulder the responsibilities of caliphate. Muhammad ibn Abu 'Abada asked him once: "Why did you delay executing the order of the commander of the faithful and why did you refuse to oblige?"

He said: "Be careful, O father of Hasan! The matter is not so." He added saying that the Imam noticed that he was crossed, so he said: "What's in it for you anyway? Should I, as you presume, become what you wish me to become, and you are as close to me then as you are right now, you would certainly be responsible for paying your dues and, in my eyes, there would be no difference between you and anyone else."

He, peace be upon him, clarifies the matter, and that there is no use to accept the caliph's offer since government will never actually be under his control. And when he notices the bitterness on the face of the person who asked him why he hesitated to accept the caliph's offer, he reminds him of his method of government should it at all be in his hands, summarizing it thus: Nobody shall have any distinction over other citizens according to the dictates of the equitable government set up by IslamicShari'a regardless of class or any other distinctions such as favoritism, friendship or support; rather, all subjects are equal in the rights they enjoy without any bias to one in preference over another, or any bias against one in order to please another.

The Imam's way of explaining his method of government is actually an outspoken way of criticizing the ruling methods followed then the foundations of which were not based on justice and equity but on special interests which guarantee for the ruler and his followers the continuity of his government and authority. The wealth, lives, possessions and everything else under the government's control was all subject to the whims and desires of the oppressive ruler and his train, distant from the principles of justice and the norms of equality secured by the Islamic message as embedded within its humanitarian method of legislation.

Method of Educating the Public

The Imams (a.s.) played a significant role in the area of educating the public, setting examples in educating through the example of one's own conduct; therefore, their methods of education were not confined merely to spreading awareness through the spoken word but went beyond that to enforcing a strict practical censorship over actions to observe the defects and shortcomings of conduct in the life of others. Here we present three examples of the norms of conduct of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) each dealing with one aspect of man's practical life:

Yasir, one of his servants, narrates that the Imam's attendants were eating some fruit one day and they were throwing away a good portion of it uneaten. Abul-Hasan (a.s.) said to them: "Praise be to God! If you have eaten to your fill, there are many who have not; so, you should feed them of it instead."32 .

In this incident, the Imam points out to the reality of wanton living which we observe in our life. When we feel that we have achieved full satisfaction of something, be it food or anything else, we do not try to satisfy the need of others for it, but we may even try to spoil it in one way or another without realizing the crime towards humanity implied in an action like that.

Sulaiman ibn Ja’far al-Ju'fi is quoted saying: "I was in the company of ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) trying to take care of some personal business of my own and I wanted to go home. He said to me, `Come with me and spend the night over my house.' So I went with him and he entered his house shortly before sunset. He noticed that his attendants were working with clay, probably mending stables, and there was a black man among them. He asked them, `What is this man doing with you?'

They said: `He is helping us, and we will pay him something.' He asked, `Did you come to an agreement with him regarding his wages?' They said, `No. He will accept whatever we pay him.' He, thereupon, started whipping them and showing signs of extreme anger. I said to him, `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Why are you so angry?' He said: `I have forbidden them so many times from doing something like that and ordered them not to employ anyone before coming to an agreement with him regarding his wages.

You know that nobody would work for you without an agreed upon wage. If you do not, and then you pay him three times as much as you first intended to pay him, he would still think that you underpaid him. But if you agree on the wage, he will praise you for fulfilling your promise and paying

him according to your agreement, and then if you give him a little bit more, he would recognize that and notice that you increased his pay."33 .

Here the Imam tries to point out a significant point related to the system of labor whereby each of the employer and the employee safeguards his rights. Often, disputes erupt about determining the wage the employee deserves in the absence of a prior agreement between the employer and the employee regarding a set wage. By determining and agreeing upon a set wage, each party safeguards its own right without finding a reason to dispute. An increase, though small, in the wage will surely cause the employee to feel grateful and thankful to his employer.

Al-Bazanti is quoted saying:

"Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) had one of his donkeys sent to convey me to his residence, so I came to the town and stayed with a dignitary for a part of the night, and we both had our supper together, then he ordered my bed to be prepared. A Tiberian pillow, a Caesarian sheet, and a Marw blanket were brought to me. Having eaten my supper, he asked me, `Would you like to retire?' I said, `Yes, may my life be sacrificed for yours.' So he put the sheet and the blanket over me and said, `May God make you sleep in good health,' and we were on the rooftop.

When he went down, I told myself that I had achieved a status with that man nobody else had attained before. It was then when I heard someone calling my name, but I did not recognize the voice till one of his (ar-Ridha’'s) servants came to me. He said: `Come meet my master;' so I went down and he came towards me, asked me for my hand to shake and he shook it with a squeeze, saying, `The Commander of the Faithful, God's peace be upon him, came once to visit Sa'sa'a ibn Sawhan, and when it was time to leave, he advised Sa'sa'a not to boast about his visit to him but to look after himself instead for he seemed to be about to depart from this world and that worldly hopes do not do a dying man any good, and he greeted him a great deal as he bid him good-bye.'"34

In the above anecdote, the Imam (a.s.) points out the significance of realistic spiritual upbringing which is not influenced by external appearances nor is deceived by artificial psychological fantasies, for the reason why others pay attention and show concern may be solely due to seeking their self-interest, or maybe due to a sincere affection, or to any other reason, without any of these reasons being linked to the reality of the self and its significance.

The Imam tries to push us to avoid being deceived by anything which would push us away from contemplating upon our real world to which our destiny is tied, and we have to be subjective in our outlooks, assessing our realities without being influenced by casual external factors.

Reluctance to Cooperate With the Rulers

The Imams (a.s.) did not for even one day admit any legitimacy to their contemporary governments, be it Umayyad or Abbaside, due to the fact that those governments were far away from the pristine Islamic system of government and to their deviation, in spirit and in conduct, from the most simple principles and rules of human justice. Executions, deportations, confiscations of properties, transgressions, according to them, all did no

hold them legally accountable, nor did they constitute a departure from the principles of creed and equity as long as they in the end served to strengthen and secure the foundations of their governments.

Anyone who appreciates his divine responsibility would try as hard as possible to stay away from participating in shouldering the responsibilities of such governments or making the latter's job easier, for this would mean his own recognition of their legitimacy and his own admission of their right to exist.

Yes; if the objective of his participation is to alleviate, as much as he can, their injustice and transgression to which innocent believers may be subjected, and to minimize the danger of their ethical and social iniquities which distance the nation from the achievement of an exemplary realization of its mission--if this is the objective, then such participation may be necessitated by one's own persistent faith, and upon this premise did the Imams refrain from encouraging any of their followers from working for such governments for that would mean assisting the aggressor and strengthening his stance.

The only exception was the case when the religion's interest dictated it. In the latter case, they used to encourage some of their influential followers to take part in the government and be employed by it as was the case of Ali ibn Yaqteen who tried several times to resign from his post at the court of Harun al-Rashid, but Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) used to encourage him to stay due to the fact that his stay meant removing injustices from many believers and the fending of some of the corruption committed by others.

We can clearly be acquainted with this negative stance of Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.) towards their rulers by examining what al-Hasan ibn al-Husayn al-Anbari tells us about Imam Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). He says: "I continued writing him for fourteen years asking his permission that I accept a job in the service of the sultan. At the conclusion of the last letter I wrote him I stated the fact that I was fearing for my life because the sultan was accusing me of being aRafidi and that he did not doubt that the reason why I declined from working for him was due to my being aRafidi .

So Abul-Hasan wrote me saying, `I have comprehended the contents of your letters and what you stated regarding your apprehension about your life's safety. If you know that should you accept the job, you would behave according to the commands of the Messenger of God (S) and your assistants and clerks would be followers of your faith, and if you use the gain you receive to help needy believers till you become their equal, then one deed will offset another; otherwise, do not.'"35 .

The Imam (a.s.) preconditions for his permission to work for the government that there should be a religious interest which decreases the damage done by the nature of the job; otherwise, it would mean a psychological and factual separation from the pristine principles of Islam and its precepts and an attachment to the corrupt world in which those rulers were living.

How could the Imam ever approve the principle of cooperating with those who played Muslim caliphs and deliberately watered down the divine content of the Islamic message by their and behavioral transgressions which

demolished the psychological and spiritual borders separating the nation from the realization of the sins and pitfalls of such transgressions? Theirs were gatherings in which wine was served, entertainers entertained, singers sang, dancers danced, filling the palaces of Umayyad and Abbaside caliphs with immorality. One of them was insolent enough to invite one of those Imams (a.s.) to participate in his drinking orgy as was the case of al-Mutawakkil with Imam Ali al-Hadi (a.s.) which unveils to us the extent of corruption and the extremity of moral decay of the Abbaside caliphate.

It is quite possible that those rulers were aware of the negative attitude of the Imams towards them and their corrupt government systems. We find them, as the anecdote above proves, doubting the loyalty of the individuals who refused to cooperate with them, charging them withRafidi sm due to the negative stance adopted by their Imams towards the conduct of those rulers.

Islamic caliphate suffered the tragedy of a humiliating deviation from Islam and a moral decay during the Umayyad and Abbaside dynasties which helped the wide dissemination of corruption and moral decay among various sectors of theummah . What sort of Muslim caliphs were those whose eyes could not sleep except after listening to the music played by their male and female singers, whose nightly meetings were not complete without the presence of wine and immorality?

What type of Islamic reality is this in which a group like that has the full say? How can anyone expect the Imams (a.s.), who were the careful custodians of rights and whose responsibility was to safeguard such rights, to permit themselves and their followers to bear any responsibility in a government led by individuals whose hands were polluted with sins and accustomed to sinning?

The negative stance of the Imams was an obvious call for the nation to be aware of its Islamic mission and principles, a loud cry to wake it up from its slumber to witness the corrupt reality lived by such Islamic "caliphs" due to the reckless and corrupt behavior of those rulers and their followers who were at the helm of leading the nation.

These are some of the characteristics and qualities which provide us with some of the outlines of the portrait of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), and the picture presented here is not complete in its pristine components which represent the actual context for it, for such a task requires the researcher to rise to grasp the Imam's loftiness which is impossible to attain by any writer, and nobody can ever describe it no matter how hard he tries.

His Distinctions and Characteristics

Lineage

He is Ali son of Musa son of Ja’far son of Muhammad son of Ali son of al-Husayn son of Ali son of Abu Talib (a.s.), eighth in the series of the Imams belonging to the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.). His birthplace is Medina, and his resting place is Toos (Iran).

Birth and Demise

Historians disagree a great deal about the year of his birth and even in determining the month as well, and they also disagree about determining the year and the month of his death. Their disagreements are not confined to the limit of a short span of time but they may be five years apart, and the disagreement is so confusing that it is very difficult to determine clearly such matters; however, we shall point out the statements recorded in this regard without favoring any of them due to the lack of purpose of such favoring which naturally requires research and investigation and a proof for selecting what seems to be the most accurate.

He was born in Medina on Friday, or Thursday, Dhul-Hijja 11, or Dhul-Qi'da, or Rabi'ul-Awwal, of the Hijri year 148 or the year 153. He died on Friday, or Monday, near the end of the month of Safar, or the 17th of Safar, or Ramadan 21, or Jumada I 18, or Dhul-Qi'da 23, or the end of Dhul-Qi'da, of the year 202 or 203 or 206. In his'Uyoon Akhbar ar-Ridha’ , al-Saduq states: "What is accurate is that he died on the 13th of Ramadan, on a Friday, in the year 203."

What is most likely is that his death took place in the year 203 as stated by al-Saduq. It is the same year in which al-Ma’mun marched towards Iraq. To say that he died in 206 is not to agree with the truth because al-Ma’mun marched towards Baghdad in the year 204, and the Imam died while he was heading in the same direction.

His Mother

There is a great deal of dispute regarding the name of his mother. Some say she was called al-Khayzaran; others say she was Arwi and that her nickname was "the blonde of Nubia," while others say she was Najma and her nickname was "Ummul-Baneen." Others say she was called Sekan the Nubian; still others say she was called Takattam as may be proven from the poetry in his praise which said:

The best in self and parenthood,

In offspring and in ancestry,

Is Ali al-Muaddam,

Eighth in series of the knowledgeable

and the clement,

An Imam descending from the Proof of God,

that is Takattam.

Offspring

Disputes exist also regarding the number of his offspring and their names. A group of scholars say that they were five sons and one daughter,

and that they were: Muhammad al-Qani', al-Hasan, Ja’far, Ibrahim, al-Husayn, and 'Ayesha.

Sabt ibn al-Jawzi, in his workTadhkiratul-Khawass , says that the sons were only four, dropping the name of Husayn from the list. Al-Mufid inclines to believe that the Imam did not have any son other than Imam Muhammad al-Jawad (a.s.), and Ibn Shahr Ashoob emphatically states so, and so does al-Tibrisi in hisA'lam al-Wara. Al-'Udad al-Qawiyya states that he had two sons, Muhammad and Musa, and that he did not have any other offspring. In his claim, he is supported byQurb al-Asnad in which the author says that al-Bazanti asked ar-Ridha’, "For years I have been asking you who your successor is and you keep telling me that it is your son even when you had no son at all, but since God has now blessed you with two sons, which one of them is he?"'Uyoon Akhbar ar-Ridha’ indicates that he had a daughter named Fatima.

We are not in the process of investigating, researching and pinpointing with accuracy the number of his offspring and their names, but what seems to be more reasonable is what al-Mufid states. What is established as a fact with us is that Imam Muhammad al-Jawad (a.s.) was his son; as regarding his other sons, nobody seems to be able to prove any facts regarding them, and God knows best.

Personality and Characteristics

Generally speaking, an Imam enjoys a unique personality and distinctive characteristics, in as far as Shi'a followers of the Imams are concerned; therefore, he is not permitted to do what others are, such as falling into error, or getting confused about a matter. Rather, infallibility is essential in him since he conveys on behalf of the Prophet (S) what seems to others to be obscure of the Message and its intricacies.

Just as we proved the infallibility of the Prophet (S), we, by the same token, prove infallibility for the Imam as well with one exception: the Imam conveys on behalf of the Prophet (S), whereas the Prophet conveys on behalf of the Almighty God. The wisdom in this argument is that should falling into error be accepted and expected from the Prophet (S) or the Imam, then doubt will result regarding the reliability of what they convey to people of juristic rules and regulations and other such matters since they are liable to err in their judgment or get confused about a particular issue.

Although the believers are not held accountable for doing what they are not supposed to be doing due to such error of judgment, the assumption of the error of judgment itself collides with the very wisdom behind the reason why prophets were sent to people at all which is to clarify to people, according to the way God Almighty intended them to, without any error or confusion, what His Will is.

The topic of infallibility is a vast one the discussion of which has no room here and which requires a dedicated research I may be able one day to tackle. What I have to clarify here is that Imamate is characterized by certain distinctive aspects such as infallibility which we cannot discuss by itself with others except after both parties agree on the basis from which it emerged; otherwise, our case would be like one who discusses the necessity

of performing the ritual prayers (salat) with someone who does not believe in the message of the Prophet (S).

The basic point upon which we have first and foremost to agree is the definition of general Imamate, then the distinctions it requires and, finally, the proofs which testify to these distinctions. It is only then that disagreeing parties can conduct a reasonable discussion. Having been convinced by unequivocal proofs of such infallibility, and having seen the Twelve Imams (a.s.) to be fully qualified to be the only ones in whom such infallibility could be observed, we became fully convinced of their unshakable superiority over all others, and that they were the ones adorned with absolute human perfection.

An Imam, according to this viewpoint, has got to be the most learned among people and the most aware of the general needs of people such as knowledge or other necessities of life, and that he has to be the most pious, the most ascetic, the most perfect in personal conduct and norms of behavior. In other words, in order to be qualified for Imamate, one has to be superior to everyone else in all aspects of perfection and its requirements which all raise him to his position of leadership. On this basis, the character of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), who is one of these Twelve Imams, becomes clearly distinctive due to its merits. But this is not the limit of the scope of this research; rather, we shall attempt to research his personality and the qualities which distinguished him from all others by our sifting into the legacy history has preserved for us of his conduct while still alive, and from the stances taken by the men of knowledge and by contemporary caliphs towards him.

Government's Attitude Towards the Imam

The attitude of the then rulers towards Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) and the other Imams may provide us with a clear view of the distinctions which raised their personalities to the zenith. And it is essential to explain the phenomenon of the government's attitude towards them which manifested itself in the surveillance imposed upon them rather than upon other distinguished dignitaries or chiefs of the Alawides, monitoring their movements and counting their steps in all their social and personal encounters. What we can mention here to explain this phenomenon are the following reasons:

1) The belief of a large number of Muslims in their Imamate and in their being the most worthy of the caliphate, and their conviction that all other caliphs are considered usurpers of authority, trespassers upon the rights ordained by God to others. This is why the politicians of the time considered them their competitors whose mere presence increased the dangers surrounding them and jeopardized the security of the very existence of their government structure.

2) Their being the magnet which attracted leading scholars and thinkers who shrank in their presence despite their intellectual advancement and distinction in the fields of the arts and knowledge and despite their genius and intellectual prowess. This caused the caliphs to feel a stronger animosity towards them and be more grudgeful towards them due to the public

fascination by them and to their attempts to be close to them and to being emotionally distant from the center of the government.

3) Their being the better alternative from the public's political standpoint to take charge of the responsibilities of government, bear its burdens, carry out its obligations and doing all of that most efficiently. This frightened the rulers and made the obscure future seem to their eyes even more so.

4) The vicious incitements about them by their opponents who bore animosity towards them and who wished thereby their elimination, and the tell-tales of even some of their own kin whose judgment was blinded by jealousy, so they kept fabricating stories and attributing them to those Imams and telling them to the rulers who were pleased to hear them since they became outlets to the grudge they felt towards those Imams and, at the same time, found in them the pretexts for annihilating and harassing them and in the end a justification to put an end to their lives and rid themselves of the complex they were suffering from due to their existence.

By these and by others can we explain the phenomenon of the rulers pursuing them and desperately trying to alienate them from the stage of events affecting the nation in order to secure a distance from the ghost of competition which could haunt them had they permitted the Imams to do as they pleased. Thus can we understand the general characteristics of the significant distinctions the personalities of those Imams enjoyed in all sectors of the society in its various centers of activity and in its various aspirations; otherwise, how do you explain this phenomenon, and why should those rulers pay the Imams so much attention?

His Knowledge

He inherited the knowledge of his grandfather the Messenger of God (S), thus becoming its pioneering fountainhead that quenched the thirst of those who were thirsty for knowledge. History narrates a great deal of his scholarly stances and intellectual discourses in which he achieved victory over those who opposed the Divine Message, excelling in various branches of scholarship with which he provided the seekers of knowledge and the thinkers of the time.

Imam Musa a-Kazim (a.s.) is reported to have often said to his sons: "Ali ibn Musa, your brother, is the learned scholar of the Descendants of Muhammad (S); therefore, you may ask him about your religion, and memorize what he tells you for I have heard my father Ja’far ibn Muhammad more than once saying, `The learned scholar of the family of Muhammad is in your loins. How I wish I had met him, for he is named after the Commander of the Faithful Ali (a.s.).'"

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is reported to have said: "I never saw ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) unable to provide the answer to any question he received, nor have I ever seen any contemporary of his more learned than he was. Al-Ma’mun used to put him to test by asking him about almost everything, and he always provided him with the answer, and his answer and example was always derived from the Holy Qur'an."

Rajaa ibn Abul-Dahhak, who was commissioned by al-Ma’mun to escort ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to his court, said: "By God! I never saw anyone more pious than him nor more often remembering God at all times nor more fearful of

God, the Exalted. People approached him whenever they knew he was present in their area, asking him questions regarding their faith and its aspects, and he would answer them and narrate a great deal ofhadith from his father who quoted his forefathers till Ali (a.s.) who quoted the Messenger of God (S). When I arrived at al-Ma’mun's court, the latter asked me about his behavior during the trip and I told him what I observed about him during the night and during the day, while riding and while halting; so, he said: `Yes, O son of al-Dahhak! This is the best man on the face of earth, the most learned, and the most pious.'"1 .

Al-Hakim is quoted inTarikh Nishapur as saying that the Imam (a.s.) used to issue religious verdicts when he was a little more then twenty years old. In Ibn Maja's Sunan, in the chapter on "Summary Of Cultivating Perfection," he is described as "the master of Banu Hashim, and al-Ma’mun used to hold him in high esteem and surround him with utmost respect, and he even made him his successor and secured the oath of allegiance for him."

Al-Ma’mun said this once in response to Banu Hashim: "As regarding your reaction to the selection by al-Ma’mun of Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) as his successor, be reminded that al-Ma’mun did not make such a selection except upon being fully aware of its implications, knowing that there is no one on the face of earth who is more distinguished, more virtuous, more pious, more ascetic, more acceptable to the elite as well as to the commoners, or more God-fearing, than he (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) is."2 .

Abul-Salt al-Harawi is quoted saying: "I never saw anyone more knowledgeable than Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). Every scholar who met him admitted the same. Al-Ma’mun gathered once a large number of theologians, jurists and orators and he (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) surpassed each and every one of them in his own respective branch of knowledge, so much so that the loser admitted his loss and the superiority of the winner over him."3 .

He is also quoted saying: "I have heard Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) saying, `I used to take my place at the theological center and the number of the learned scholars at Medina was quite large, yet when a question over-taxed the mind of one of those scholars, he and the rest would point at me, and they would send me their queries, and I would answer them all."4 .

In his discourse regarding the issue of succession, al-Ma’mun said: "I do not know any man on the face of earth who is more suited (to be heir to the throne) than this man."5 .

Al-Manaqib records the following: "When people disputed regarding Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), Muhammad ibn 'Isa al-Yaqtini said, `I have collected as many as eighteen thousand of his answers to questions put forth to him.' A group of critics, including Abu Bakr the orator in hisTarikh and al-Tha'labi in histafsir and al-Sam'ani in his dissertation and in al-Mu'tazz in his work, in addition to others, have all quotedhadith from him."6 .

After an intellectual discourse with al-Ma’mun, Ali ibn al-Jahm said: "Al-Ma’mun stood up to perform the prayers ritual and took Muhammad ibn Ja’far, who was present there, by the hand, and I followed both of them. He asked him: `What do you think of your nephew?' He answered, `A learned scholar although we never saw him being tutored by any learned man.' Al-Ma’mun said: `This nephew of yours is a member of the family of the

Prophet (S) about whom the Prophet (S) said: `The virtuous among my descendants and the elite among my progeny are the most thoughtful when young, the most learned when adult; therefore, do not teach them for they are more learned than you are, nor will they ever take you out of guidance, nor lead you into misguidance.'"7 .

Ibn al-Athir writes: "He (al-Ma’mun) discerned the descendants of Banu al-Abbas and Banu Ali and did not find anyone more than him (ar-Ridha’, A.S.) in accomplishments, piety and knowledge."8 .

We do not need the testimony of anyone to convince us of the distinction enjoyed by Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) due to his knowledge over all others. Suffices us to review the books ofhadith which are filled with his statements and dictation in various arts which every individual, regardless of the loftiness of his degree of knowledge, became dwarfed upon meeting him, feeling his inferiority and the superiority of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.).

Ethical and Humane Conduct

Good manners constitute a significant part of one's personality. They unveil the innermost nature of the individual, highlighting the extent of its purity of origin when it translates belief into action. The Imam was characterized by a most noble personality which won him the love of the commoners as well as the elite, by extraordinary humanity derived from the spirit of the Message itself one of whose custodians he himself was, a person who safeguarded it and inherited its innermost secrets.

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is quoted saying: "I never saw Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) angering anyone by something he said, nor did I ever see him interrupting anyone, nor refusing to do someone a favor he was able to do, nor did he ever stretch his legs before an audience, nor leaned upon something while his companion did not, nor did he ever call any of his servants or attendants a bad name, nor did I ever see him spit or burst into laughter; rather, his laughter was just a smile. When he was ready to eat and he sat to be served, he seated with him all his attendants, including the doorman and the groom." He adds, "Do not, therefore, believe anyone who claims that he saw someone else enjoying such accomplishments."9 .

A guest once kept entertaining him part of the night when the lamp started fading and the guest stretched his hand to fix it, but Abul-Hasan (a.s.) swiftly checked him and fixed it himself, saying, "We are folks who do not let their guest tend on them."10 .

Al-Manaqib states that ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) once went to the public bath-house and someone asked him to give him a massage, so he kept giving the man a massage till someone recognized him and told that person who that dignitary was. The man felt extremely embarrassed; he apologized to the Imam (a.s.) and gave him a massage.11 .

Muhammad ibn al-Fadl narrates the following anecdote regarding the Imam's simple personality. He says:

"Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), on the occasion of Eidul-Fitr, said to one of his attendants, `May God accept your good deeds and ours,' then he stood up and left. On the occasion of Eidul-Adha, he said to the same man, `May God accept our good deeds and yours.' I asked him, `O son of the Messenger of God! You said something to this man on the occasion of Eidul-Fitr and

something else on the occasion of Eidul-Adha; why?' He answered: `I pleaded God to accept his good deeds and ours because his action was similar to mine and I combined it with mine in my plea, whereas I pleaded God to accept our good deeds and his because we are capable of offering the ceremonial sacrifice while he is not; so, our action is different from his.'"12 .

Thus does Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) become in total harmony with his message in the area of ethics, personifying the latter into action derived from the spirit of the message whereby he ascends to the summit of human perfection, rising thereby to the shores of the individual's own real greatness. It is through this and similar means that the sincerity of faith and loftiness and dignity of the self are recognized.

Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) defines for us the Islamic theory as the rules which govern the actual dealings of man with his brother man from which we can achieve the inspiration that Islam abolishes the then class distinctions among individuals and groups in the areas of public rights and the safeguarding of man's dignity, and that the difference which we must recognize regarding these areas is the difference between one who obeys God and one who does not.

A man once said to the Imam: "By God! There is nobody on the face of earth who is more honorable than your forefathers." The Imam responded by saying: "Their piety secured their honor, and their obedience of God made them fortunate."13 .

Another man said to him: "By God! You are the best of all people!" He said to him: "Do not swear so. Better than me is one who is more obedient to God and more pious. By God! The following verse was never abrogated: `And We have made you nations and tribes so that you may know each other; verily the best of you in God's sight is the most pious.'"14 .

Abul-Salt once asked him: "O son of the Messenger of God! What do you say about something people have been criticizing you for?" He asked: "What is it?" He said: "They claim that you call people your slaves." He said: "God! Creator of the heavens and the earth, Knower of the hidden and the manifest! I invoke Thee to testify that I have never said so, nor did I ever hear that any of my forefathers had said so! God! You are the Knower of the many injustices this nation has committed against us, and this is just one of them..." Then he came to Abul-Salt and said: "O Abdul-Salam! If all people, as some claim, are our slaves, who did we buy them from?" Abul-Salt answered: "You are right, O son of the Messenger of God..." Then the Imam said: "O Abdul-Salam! Do you deny the right which God has allotted for us to be charged with the authority as others deny?" He said: "God forbid! I do acknowledge such right."15 .

The Imam here denies such an allegation about him and his forefathers and rejects the vicious accusation which their enemies use against him to tarnish his image, considering it one of the many injustices committed against the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.). Rather, he and the Household of the Prophet (S) consider people to be equal in their general obligations except in the right of government which God ordained to be theirs solely, for others have no right to claim it for themselves. With the exception of the right to obey God in its most pristine implications which raised their status in the sight of

God and man, all are the slaves of God. They share the same parents and worship the same God.

Abdullah ibn al-Salt quotes a man from Balkh saying: "I accompanied ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) during his trip to Khurasan. One day he ordered preparations for his meal to which he invited all his attendants, blacks and non-blacks, so I said: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Maybe these should have a separate eating arrangement.' He said: `God Almighty is One; the father (Adam) and the mother (Eve) are the same, and people are rewarded according to their deeds.'"16 .

The Imam does not see any difference between him and his servants and attendants except in the degree of good deeds; other than that, all distinctions are void when the matter is related to common obligations in which all individuals are equal, for each one of them is created by the same God, and each has the same father, Adam, who was created of dust.

When we see the Imam sitting at the table surrounded by his servants, his doorman, and his groom, he is thus teaching the nation a lesson in virtuous humanity which believes in the dignity of man in order to demonstrate the theory of Islam in practice showing the nature of behavior man should undertake in his conduct towards his brother man. The loftiness of status and the elevation of career must not necessitate that a man of a less status or one whose career is less coveted should be despised or made to feel inferior to his brother man even if he is a servant.

This is so in order to eliminate the complex class distinctions which widen the gap between the members of the society whose energies would then be split into opposing parties torn by grudge and consumed by hatred.

Islam enacted the law of equality among the members of the society in the areas of general obligations in order to emancipate man's dignity from class obligations which dominated the way of life during the pre-Islamic era and were adopted by nations of old. God Almighty has said: "The best of you in the eyes of God is the one who is most pious."17 The Prophet (S) said: "All of you descended from Adam, and Adam was created of dust." He also said: "No Arab can be held superior to a non-Arab except through superiority of his degree of piety."

Ibrahim ibn al-Abbas al-Suli is quoted saying: "I heard Ali ibn Musa ar-Ridha’ saying, `I swear by emancipation--and whenever I swore by it, I would emancipate one of my slaves till I emancipated each and every one of them--that I do not see myself as better than that (and he pointed to a black slave of his who remained in his service) on account of my kinship to the Messenger of God (S) except if I do a good deed which would render me better.'"18 .

Thus does the Imam define for us the good Islamic conduct of safeguarding the dignity of man and the elimination of all class distinctions except the distinction of good deeds. He, peace be upon him, does not view his kinship to the Prophet (S) as providing him with a distinction over a black slave except if such kinship is combined with good deeds which render the doer distinction and superiority. Yasir, one of his servants, said once: "Abul-Hasan said to us once: `If I leave the table before you do, while you are still eating, do not leave on my account till you are through.' It may

happen that he calls upon some of us to his service and he is told that they are eating, whereupon he says: `Leave them to finish their meal first.'" Nadir, another servant, says: "Abul-Hasan did not require us to do anything for him except if we had finished eating our meal."19 .

These are samples of his actual conduct and humanity which he inherited as a fragrant legacy the perfume of which is goodness and mercy from his grandfather the greatest Prophet (S) who crowned his message with the banner of good conduct when he said: "I have been sent to perfect the code of good conduct." Such was that genuine humane legacy from whose spirit nations derive their strength and upon which they build the pillars of their glory and through which they secure the continuation of their very existence.

His Conduct Regarding His Appearance

There is no doubt that, generally speaking, the Imams (a.s.) were more distant than anyone else from the alluring wares of this vanishing world, and most distant from its ornamentations and allurements. But the concept of asceticism according to them was not limited to wearing modest coarse clothes or eating very simple food. Rather, its limits extended beyond that, for the ascetic person is the one who does not allow the pleasures of this world to take control over him without being able to take control of them, one who does not see this world as the ultimate goal he seeks; rather, when it comes towards him, the believer is entitled to enjoy its good things, and when it forsakes him, he contends himself that God's rewards are more lasting.

Al-Aabi is quoted inNathr al-Durar as saying:

"A group of sufis visited ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) when he was in Khurasan, and they said to him, `The commander of the faithful looked into the authority God Almighty entrusted to him, and he found you, members of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), to be the most deserving of all people to be the leaders.

Then he discerned you, members of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.), and he found yourself the most worthy of leading the people, so he decided to entrust such leadership to you. The nation is in need of one who wears coarse clothes, eats the most simple food, rides the donkey and visits the sick.' Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was first leaning, then he adjusted the way he was sitting and said: `Joseph (Yousuf) was a Prophet who used to wear silk mantles brocaded with gold. He sat on the thrones of the Pharaohs and ruled.

An Imam is required to be just and fair; when he says something, he says the truth, and when he passes a judgment, he judges equitably, and when he promises something, he fulfills his promise. God did not forbid (an Imam) from wearing a particular type of clothes or eating a particular type of food.' Then he recited the Qur'anic verse: `Say: Who has forbidden the beautiful (gifts) of God which He has produced for His servants, and the good things, clean and pure (which He has provided) for sustenance?'"20 .

Imam al-Jawad (a.s.) was asked once about his view regarding musk. He answered: "My father ordered musk to be made for him in a ben tree in the amount of seven hundred dirhams. Al-Fadl ibn Sahl wrote him saying that people criticized him for that. He wrote back: `O Fadl! Have you not come

to know that Joseph (Yousuf), who was a Prophet, used to wear silk clothes brocaded with gold, and that he used to sit on gilded thrones, and that all of that did not decrease any of his wisdom?' Then he ordered a galia moschata (perfume of musk and ambergris) to be made for him in the amount of four thousand dirhams.'"21 .

Thus does the Imam prove that the outward appearance of asceticism has nothing to do with true asceticism; rather, it may even be a fake whereby someone tries to attract the attention of others. This is why Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) and other Imams did not see anything wrong with meeting the public with an appearance of luxury in what they put on or ate as long as it did not collide with the reality of asceticism which is the building of the self from within to renounce the world and its allurement and regard it as a vanishing display with a short span of life.

This does not forbid the believer from enjoying its pleasures in the way which God made permissible. God did not create the good things in this world for the disbeliever to enjoy while depriving the believers there from. Rather, God considers the believer to be more worthy of such enjoyment when he submits himself to God and expends it in His Path.

Ibn Abbas tells us the following about Imam ar-Ridha’'s ascetic conduct: "Ar-Ridha’ used to sit on a leaf mat during the summer and on a straw sack during the winter; he used to put on coarse clothes, but when he went out to meet the public, he put on his very best."22 So, when he is by himself, away from public life, his soul finds harmony with denying what is fake, that is, the decorations and allurements of this life. But when he goes out to meet people, he puts on his best for them following their own nature of holding the appearances of this world as significant, enjoying its good things. This realistically ascetic conduct of the Imam provides us with a glorious example of the truth regarding the Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.) and their pure view of life which is free from any disturbing fake or pretense.

Clemency and Tolerance

Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) had recommended his son ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to be the Imam after him, making him his own deputy in faring with his wealth, women, sons and the mothers of his sons, without permitting any of his other sons to fare with anything after him, and he wrote his will indicating so and sealed it with his own seal, invoking the Wrath of God upon anyone who would unlawfully break the seal after having secured the testimony of a number of his own household and followers. But the brothers of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) disputed with their brother regarding their father's will and what he had left for them. According to al-Kafi, Yazid ibn Salit is quoted saying:

"Abu Umran al-Talhi was the judge at Medina when his (ar-Ridha’'s) brothers presented him as their opponent in their dispute. Al-Abbas ibn Musa said: `May God bring through you reconciliation and happiness. At the bottom of this written statement there is a treasure and a jewel and he (ar-Ridha’) wishes to keep it away from us and take it all to himself, and our father entrusted everything to him, leaving us helpless. Had I not checked myself, I would have told you so before a crowd of people.' Ibrahim ibn Muhammad, who was one of the witnesses of the will, jumped at him and

said: `Then you by God would be telling something we do not accept to be coming even from you, and we will hold you as a liar, and you will be among us blamed and despised, nicknamed by the young and the old as a liar.

Your father knew you best if there was any good in you and your father knew you inside and out, and he could not trust you to guard two pieces of dates.' Then his uncle Ishaq ibn Ja’far jumped at him and pulled him by the robe saying, `You are a silly, weakling, and a fool; add these to your previous faults,' and he was supported in his view by all others. Abu Umran, the judge, said to Ali, `Stand up, O father of al-Hasan! Suffices me today the curse your father had invoked, and your father was quite generous with you.

No! By God! Nobody knows a son better than his father. No! By God! Your father was neither weak in his intellect nor shallow in his view.' Al-Abbas said to the judge, `May God bring conciliation through you! Please remove the seal and read the contents.' Abu Umran said, `No, I shall not remove it; suffices me today the curse your father invoked.' Al-Abbas said, `I shall remove it.' He said, `That is up to you.' So al-Abbas removed the seal and the contents spelled out their exclusion and the inclusion only of Ali, and an order that they all, whether they liked it or not, were to listen to and obey Imam Ali ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). In short, the removal of the seal spelled their destruction, scandal and humiliation, whereas Ali remained the winner.

"Ali then turned to al-Abbas and said: `Brother! I know that what made you do what you did is the fact that you have fines and debts to pay. Sa'id! Go ahead and take an account of their debts, then pay their dues on their own behalf. After that take out their zakat and clear their name. By God! I shall never abandon your assistance and I shall never cut my ties from you as long as I walk on this earth; so, you may say whatever you please.'

"Al-Abbas said: `Do not give us anything other than what rightfully belongs to us, and what you hold of our own is even more.' He said: `You may say anything you want to say, for the offer is yours; if you do good deeds, you shall be rewarded by God, and if you commit a bad deed, God is Most Forgiving, Merciful. By God! You know very well that today I have no son nor heir except you; so, if I keep anything which belongs to you from you or save what you think to belong to you, it shall always remain yours and will always be returned to you. By God! I have never owned anything since your father, may God be pleased with him, passed away except that I relinquished it to you as you have seen.'

"Al-Abbas leaped and said: `By God it is not so! Nor God has given you authority over us..., but..., but it is our father's jealousy and he willed a will which God does not accept from him nor from you, and you know very well that I know Safwan ibn Yahya, the Sabiri seller at Kufa. If I ever get there, I shall strangle him and you with him.'

"Ali said: `There is no power or will except by the Will of God, the Sublime, the Great... Brothers! God knows that I desire nothing other than your happiness and well-being. God! If you know that I love their well-being, and that I want nothing but good for them, that I do not severe my ties with them, that I am kind to them, concerned about their affairs day and night..., then grant me good rewards for it. But if I am contrariwise, then I

invoke You, Knower of the unknown, to grant me the rewards of my intentions: good for good and evil for evil. Lord! Bring them to the path of righteousness, and make life good for them, and keep the snares of the devil away from us and from them, and assist them to be able to worship Thee, and help them see Thy guidance. As for me, brother, I desire nothing other than your happiness, working hard for your own well-being, and God is my Witness.'

"To this, al-Abbas said: `How well I know your mastery over words! And there is no mud with me for your spade!'"23 .

With these rude words al-Abbas ended his argument with his brother, Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), despite the fact that the Imam was very kind and clement in his argument with him, without articulating any unkind word, that it was already established that right was on the side of the Imam, and that their own transgression dragged him into such a situation which did not befit his lofty status. This, indeed, is indicative of a great deal of clemency and tolerance towards an unlimited aggression.

Although al-Abbas discarded the norms of good manners in his confrontation with his brother by articulating disrespectful words and by committing a sin against his own father Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) by accusing him of being jealous and biased, which causes the other party to be on the offensive, or at least would push him away from a balanced temper, this is not an artificial show of clemency and tolerance from the Imam (a.s.); rather, it is derived from the spirit of genuine goodness and love whereby he and the other Imams were characterized when others challenged them.

On the other hand, the Imam (a.s.) tries to cause others to adorn themselves with the same trait of clemency and tolerance upon being wronged as an element of good relationship among them, justifying this by saying that it increases the dignity of man, for clemency and tolerance, when the ability to deal equal blows and effect equal retribution express the power of anger in man and his control over his rash temper upon being challenged, this causes others to respect and venerate such a person especially when that person shoulders the responsibilities of authority. Al-Aabi says:

"A man sentenced to be beheaded was brought to al-Ma’mun while ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was among his train. Al-Ma’mun asked him: `Father of al-Hasan! What is your view?' He said: `All I can say is that God only increases the dignity of those whose good will causes them to forgive.' He, therefore, forgave the man."24

Swiftness of Response

Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was endowed with a readiness to respond coupled with the strength of argument and oratory to which extra-ordinary expressions freely submitted without making the over-all meaning too difficult to comprehend. His arguments with the heads of other religions, with foremost writers, and with atheists in which he outwitted them with his clear argument and decisive arguments, all provide us with a glorious indication that he used to enjoy the ability to provide a ready answer and a speed in intellectual reasoning.

This is why learned scholars held him in high esteem and hesitated to challenge him to debate in any field of knowledge as actually happened after

his arguments with the highest authorities of other religions at a meeting al-Ma’mun arranged at his court and the audience were tongue-tied when he challenged them to put for discussion whatever came to their minds.

His Patience and Perseverance

The patience and perseverance of the Imam manifest themselves clearly when he had to face psychological and emotional crises. When he went to say his farewell at the Ka'ba, Mecca, upon being ordered by al-Ma’mun to be present at his court in Khurasan, he was faced with an emotional situation involving his only son Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ali al-Jawad, but he maintained with an iron will his self-control, solacing himself with a patient heart, submitting to God's Will and Decree.

Umayya ibn Ali states: "I was sitting with Abul-Hasan (a.s.) at Mecca during the year in which he performed thehajj prior to his trip to Khurasan, and Abu Ja’far was with him when he was bidding the House (Ka'ba) good-bye. Having finished his tawaf, he went to the maqam and said his prayers there. Abu Ja’far, accompanied by Muaffaq, was making his tawaf, till he reached the Stone. There he sat and he prolonged his sitting there. Muaffaq said to him: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! It is time you stood up.'

He answered: `I do not wish to leave this place at all except by the Will of God,' and grief could easily be seen clouding over his face. Muaffaq approached Abul-Hasan and said to him: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Abu Ja’far is sitting by the Stone unwilling to leave,' so Abul-Hasan stood up, came to Abu Ja’far and said: `Stand up, my loved one.' But his son said: `I do not wish to leave this place...' He said: `Do stand up, O my loved one.' After a while, he said to his father: `How can I stand up seeing that you have already said your farewell at the House never to return again?' He said: `Do stand up, my loved one.' He stood up and left with his father."

The Imam (a.s.) patiently put up with numerous norms of persecution and injustice inflicted upon him during the reign of (Harun) al-Rashid starting with the tragedy of his father, passing by the tragedies to which the Alawides were subjected, and ending with the unfair instigations to al-Rashid by the Imam's opponents to kill him and eliminate him.

The strength of the patience and perseverance of the Imam become manifest when we examine the thinly veiled political persecution from which he suffered during al-Ma’mun's reign especially after the latter appointed him as his heir to the throne, fully knowing that al-Ma’mun was not sincere in his intention but rather enacted a political act in which al-Ma’mun played the major role solely to provide security to the shaky foundations of his regime due to the storming events the outcome of which was reflected upon the issue of who would succeed him on the throne.

The extent of the suffering of the Imam, the degree of his bitterness and agony, and the amount of grief and sorrow which filled his heart due to the treatment meted to him by the government, can be assessed; yet he buried all of that in the depth of his mind with mute patience and perseverance. Yasir, his servant, said once: "Whenever ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) returned home on Friday from the mosque, with his face sweating and stained by blowing dust, he would raise his hands and invoke God saying, `God! If the only

way I am relieved from my distress is by death, then I invoke Thee to hasten its hour.'"

Suffices to assess the extent of his patience and perseverance to simply be aware of the fact that although he was God's Argument over His creation, he was powerless to do anything while seeing right being abandoned and wrong upheld.

Generosity

In a dialogue with al-Bazanti, the Imam said: "Anyone who receives a boon is in danger: He has to carry out God's commandments in its regard. By God! Whenever God blesses me with something, I continue to be in extreme apprehension till (and here he made a motion with his hand) I take out some of it and spend it in the way God has ordained in its regard." Al-Bazanti asked him: "May my life be sacrificed for yours! You, in your status of high esteem, fear that much?" He answered: "Yes, indeed! And I praise my Creator for the blessings He bestowed upon me."25 .

The Imam's generosity and thoughtfulness emanate out of this good aspect of his conviction which depends on the principle of letting others share in the wealth with which God blesses him, and in what blessings and favors He bestows upon him. God's rights in this context are the shares of the needy and the poor in this world whose ability to earn a decent living was hampered by either severe employment conditions, or disability to work due to old age, or because of being left stranded away from their original home, in addition to others who were forced by the necessities of life to stretch their hands to others for help.

To ask others is humiliating, for it shatters the dignity of the person who is stretching his hand asking and by his psychological appeal to the breath of humanity in the person he is asking. In this story, the Imam guides us to realize a magnificent fact about the human psychology, that is, to give is not a favor someone does to someone else begging him for help; rather, it is his way of thanking God for the blessings with which He blessed him. The person who is blessed is in danger until he takes out of it the rights in it which are God's.

The Imam's method in giving is derived from such an angle of the human nature. Eleisha ibn Hamza says: "I was once talking to ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) when a large crowd of people assembled to ask him about what is permissible in Islam and what is not. A man as tall as Adam came to him and said: `Assalamo Alaikom, O Son of the Messenger of God! I am a man who loves you, your fathers and grandfathers, and I have just been on my way to perform the pilgrimage when I discovered that I had lost everything with me and now I do not have anything enough even for a leg of the trip. If you will, please help me with the expense of going back home, and I am a recipient of God's blessing (i.e. well to do).

As soon as I reach there, I will give to the poor as much as you will give me, for I do not qualify to be a recipient of alms.' He said to him: `Sit, may God be merciful to you,' then he kept talking to people till they dispersed except that man, Sulaiman al-Ja’fari, Khuthai'ama and myself. Then he (ar-Ridha’) said: `Do you permit me to enter (the room)?' Sulaiman said to him: `May God advance your endeavor.'26 So he entered the room and stayed for

about an hour after which he came out and closed the door behind him, stretched his hand above the door and said: `Where is the man from Khurasan?' The man answered: `Here I am!' He said: `Take these two hundred dinars, use them for your preparations for the trip; may God bring you blessings thereby, and do not spend an equal amount to it on my behalf, and leave the room in a way that I do not see you and you do not see me,' then he left.

Sulaiman then said: `May my life be sacrificed for yours! You have made quite a generous offer, but why did you hide your face?' He answered: `I did so for fear of seeing the humiliation on the face of the man due to my assistance for him. Have you not heard thehadith of the Messenger of God (S) in which he said: `The one who hides a good deeds receives rewards equal to performing the pilgrimage seventy times; one who announces his sin is humiliated, while one who hides it is forgiven'? Have you heard the saying of the example of the first case: Whenever I approach him, one day, with a plea, I return home and my dignity is still with me. For he hides himself from the person who appeals to him when he gives him something so that he does not see the humiliation on his face, and so that the pleading person retains his dignity when he does not see the face of the benevolent one who is giving him?"

He asks him to leave without seeing him in order to safeguard himself against feeling as having the upper hand over the pleading person, and in order to relieve the pleading person from having to show his gratitude to him.

While in Khurasan, he once distributed his entire wealth to the poor on the day of Arafat, so al-Fadl ibn Sahl said to him: "Now you are bankrupt!" he said: "On the contrary! I am now wealthier than ever. Do not consider trading my wealth for God's rewards and pleasure as bankruptcy."27 .

He does not give others in order to buy their affection or friendship; rather, he considers giving with generosity as a good trait whereby man gets nearer to his Maker by including His servants in the wealth with which He blessed him. This is the difference between his method of giving and the method of others. Ya'qub ibn Ishaq al-Nawbakhti is quoted saying:

"A man passed by Abul-Hasan and begged him to give him according to the extent of his kindness. He said: `I cannot afford that.' So he said: `Then give me according to mine,' whereupon he ordered his servant to give the man two hundred dinars."28 .

The reason why the Imam abstained from giving the man according to the extent of his own kindness, as the man asked him the first time, is probably due to the fact that he simply did not have as much money as he liked to give. As regarding his own affection towards the poor and the indigent, and his way of looking after them, Mu'ammar ibn Khallad narrates this anecdote:

"Whenever Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) was about to eat his meal, he would bring a large platter and select the choicest food on the table and put on it, then he would order it to be given away to the poor. After that he would recite the following verse: `But he hath made no haste on the path that is steep.'29 After that he would say: `God, the Exalted and the Sublime,

knows that not everyone has the ability to free a slave, nevertheless He found means for them to achieve Paradise (by feeding others).'"30 .

Thus does the Imam sense the weight of deprivation under which the poor moan and suffer; therefore, he shares his best food with them in response to the call of humanity and kindness and in harmony with the spirit of the message with which God entrusted him.

Al-Bazanti tells the story of a letter Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) wrote to his son Imam Abu Ja’far (a.s.) which personifies the generosity and spirit of giving deeply rooted in the hearts of the Prophet's Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.); he says: "I read the letter of Abul-Hasan Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) to Abu Ja’far which said: `O Abu Ja’far! I have heard that when you ride, the servants take you out of the city through its small gate.

This is due to their being miser so that nobody asks you for something. I plead you by the right I have upon you that every time you enter into or get out of the city, you should do so through its large gate, and when you ride, take gold and silver with you, and every time you are asked, you should give. If any of your uncles asks you for something, you should give him no less than fifty dinars, and you yourself may determine the maximum amount you would like to give; and if any of your aunts asks you for something, do not give her less than twenty-five dinars, and it is up to you to determine the maximum amount. I only desire that God raises your status; therefore, keep giving away and do not fear that the Lord of the Throne will ever throw you into poverty.'"31

Equity

The Imam (a.s.) did not have the chance to rule for any period of time so that we may discuss his practical style of government, but we can still be acquainted with that through reviewing his statements to some of his followers who very much desired that the Imam should shoulder the responsibilities of caliphate. Muhammad ibn Abu 'Abada asked him once: "Why did you delay executing the order of the commander of the faithful and why did you refuse to oblige?"

He said: "Be careful, O father of Hasan! The matter is not so." He added saying that the Imam noticed that he was crossed, so he said: "What's in it for you anyway? Should I, as you presume, become what you wish me to become, and you are as close to me then as you are right now, you would certainly be responsible for paying your dues and, in my eyes, there would be no difference between you and anyone else."

He, peace be upon him, clarifies the matter, and that there is no use to accept the caliph's offer since government will never actually be under his control. And when he notices the bitterness on the face of the person who asked him why he hesitated to accept the caliph's offer, he reminds him of his method of government should it at all be in his hands, summarizing it thus: Nobody shall have any distinction over other citizens according to the dictates of the equitable government set up by IslamicShari'a regardless of class or any other distinctions such as favoritism, friendship or support; rather, all subjects are equal in the rights they enjoy without any bias to one in preference over another, or any bias against one in order to please another.

The Imam's way of explaining his method of government is actually an outspoken way of criticizing the ruling methods followed then the foundations of which were not based on justice and equity but on special interests which guarantee for the ruler and his followers the continuity of his government and authority. The wealth, lives, possessions and everything else under the government's control was all subject to the whims and desires of the oppressive ruler and his train, distant from the principles of justice and the norms of equality secured by the Islamic message as embedded within its humanitarian method of legislation.

Method of Educating the Public

The Imams (a.s.) played a significant role in the area of educating the public, setting examples in educating through the example of one's own conduct; therefore, their methods of education were not confined merely to spreading awareness through the spoken word but went beyond that to enforcing a strict practical censorship over actions to observe the defects and shortcomings of conduct in the life of others. Here we present three examples of the norms of conduct of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) each dealing with one aspect of man's practical life:

Yasir, one of his servants, narrates that the Imam's attendants were eating some fruit one day and they were throwing away a good portion of it uneaten. Abul-Hasan (a.s.) said to them: "Praise be to God! If you have eaten to your fill, there are many who have not; so, you should feed them of it instead."32 .

In this incident, the Imam points out to the reality of wanton living which we observe in our life. When we feel that we have achieved full satisfaction of something, be it food or anything else, we do not try to satisfy the need of others for it, but we may even try to spoil it in one way or another without realizing the crime towards humanity implied in an action like that.

Sulaiman ibn Ja’far al-Ju'fi is quoted saying: "I was in the company of ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) trying to take care of some personal business of my own and I wanted to go home. He said to me, `Come with me and spend the night over my house.' So I went with him and he entered his house shortly before sunset. He noticed that his attendants were working with clay, probably mending stables, and there was a black man among them. He asked them, `What is this man doing with you?'

They said: `He is helping us, and we will pay him something.' He asked, `Did you come to an agreement with him regarding his wages?' They said, `No. He will accept whatever we pay him.' He, thereupon, started whipping them and showing signs of extreme anger. I said to him, `May my life be sacrificed for yours! Why are you so angry?' He said: `I have forbidden them so many times from doing something like that and ordered them not to employ anyone before coming to an agreement with him regarding his wages.

You know that nobody would work for you without an agreed upon wage. If you do not, and then you pay him three times as much as you first intended to pay him, he would still think that you underpaid him. But if you agree on the wage, he will praise you for fulfilling your promise and paying

him according to your agreement, and then if you give him a little bit more, he would recognize that and notice that you increased his pay."33 .

Here the Imam tries to point out a significant point related to the system of labor whereby each of the employer and the employee safeguards his rights. Often, disputes erupt about determining the wage the employee deserves in the absence of a prior agreement between the employer and the employee regarding a set wage. By determining and agreeing upon a set wage, each party safeguards its own right without finding a reason to dispute. An increase, though small, in the wage will surely cause the employee to feel grateful and thankful to his employer.

Al-Bazanti is quoted saying:

"Ar-Ridha’ (a.s.) had one of his donkeys sent to convey me to his residence, so I came to the town and stayed with a dignitary for a part of the night, and we both had our supper together, then he ordered my bed to be prepared. A Tiberian pillow, a Caesarian sheet, and a Marw blanket were brought to me. Having eaten my supper, he asked me, `Would you like to retire?' I said, `Yes, may my life be sacrificed for yours.' So he put the sheet and the blanket over me and said, `May God make you sleep in good health,' and we were on the rooftop.

When he went down, I told myself that I had achieved a status with that man nobody else had attained before. It was then when I heard someone calling my name, but I did not recognize the voice till one of his (ar-Ridha’'s) servants came to me. He said: `Come meet my master;' so I went down and he came towards me, asked me for my hand to shake and he shook it with a squeeze, saying, `The Commander of the Faithful, God's peace be upon him, came once to visit Sa'sa'a ibn Sawhan, and when it was time to leave, he advised Sa'sa'a not to boast about his visit to him but to look after himself instead for he seemed to be about to depart from this world and that worldly hopes do not do a dying man any good, and he greeted him a great deal as he bid him good-bye.'"34

In the above anecdote, the Imam (a.s.) points out the significance of realistic spiritual upbringing which is not influenced by external appearances nor is deceived by artificial psychological fantasies, for the reason why others pay attention and show concern may be solely due to seeking their self-interest, or maybe due to a sincere affection, or to any other reason, without any of these reasons being linked to the reality of the self and its significance.

The Imam tries to push us to avoid being deceived by anything which would push us away from contemplating upon our real world to which our destiny is tied, and we have to be subjective in our outlooks, assessing our realities without being influenced by casual external factors.

Reluctance to Cooperate With the Rulers

The Imams (a.s.) did not for even one day admit any legitimacy to their contemporary governments, be it Umayyad or Abbaside, due to the fact that those governments were far away from the pristine Islamic system of government and to their deviation, in spirit and in conduct, from the most simple principles and rules of human justice. Executions, deportations, confiscations of properties, transgressions, according to them, all did no

hold them legally accountable, nor did they constitute a departure from the principles of creed and equity as long as they in the end served to strengthen and secure the foundations of their governments.

Anyone who appreciates his divine responsibility would try as hard as possible to stay away from participating in shouldering the responsibilities of such governments or making the latter's job easier, for this would mean his own recognition of their legitimacy and his own admission of their right to exist.

Yes; if the objective of his participation is to alleviate, as much as he can, their injustice and transgression to which innocent believers may be subjected, and to minimize the danger of their ethical and social iniquities which distance the nation from the achievement of an exemplary realization of its mission--if this is the objective, then such participation may be necessitated by one's own persistent faith, and upon this premise did the Imams refrain from encouraging any of their followers from working for such governments for that would mean assisting the aggressor and strengthening his stance.

The only exception was the case when the religion's interest dictated it. In the latter case, they used to encourage some of their influential followers to take part in the government and be employed by it as was the case of Ali ibn Yaqteen who tried several times to resign from his post at the court of Harun al-Rashid, but Imam Musa ibn Ja’far (a.s.) used to encourage him to stay due to the fact that his stay meant removing injustices from many believers and the fending of some of the corruption committed by others.

We can clearly be acquainted with this negative stance of Ahl al-Bayt (a.s.) towards their rulers by examining what al-Hasan ibn al-Husayn al-Anbari tells us about Imam Abul-Hasan ar-Ridha’ (a.s.). He says: "I continued writing him for fourteen years asking his permission that I accept a job in the service of the sultan. At the conclusion of the last letter I wrote him I stated the fact that I was fearing for my life because the sultan was accusing me of being aRafidi and that he did not doubt that the reason why I declined from working for him was due to my being aRafidi .

So Abul-Hasan wrote me saying, `I have comprehended the contents of your letters and what you stated regarding your apprehension about your life's safety. If you know that should you accept the job, you would behave according to the commands of the Messenger of God (S) and your assistants and clerks would be followers of your faith, and if you use the gain you receive to help needy believers till you become their equal, then one deed will offset another; otherwise, do not.'"35 .

The Imam (a.s.) preconditions for his permission to work for the government that there should be a religious interest which decreases the damage done by the nature of the job; otherwise, it would mean a psychological and factual separation from the pristine principles of Islam and its precepts and an attachment to the corrupt world in which those rulers were living.

How could the Imam ever approve the principle of cooperating with those who played Muslim caliphs and deliberately watered down the divine content of the Islamic message by their and behavioral transgressions which

demolished the psychological and spiritual borders separating the nation from the realization of the sins and pitfalls of such transgressions? Theirs were gatherings in which wine was served, entertainers entertained, singers sang, dancers danced, filling the palaces of Umayyad and Abbaside caliphs with immorality. One of them was insolent enough to invite one of those Imams (a.s.) to participate in his drinking orgy as was the case of al-Mutawakkil with Imam Ali al-Hadi (a.s.) which unveils to us the extent of corruption and the extremity of moral decay of the Abbaside caliphate.

It is quite possible that those rulers were aware of the negative attitude of the Imams towards them and their corrupt government systems. We find them, as the anecdote above proves, doubting the loyalty of the individuals who refused to cooperate with them, charging them withRafidi sm due to the negative stance adopted by their Imams towards the conduct of those rulers.

Islamic caliphate suffered the tragedy of a humiliating deviation from Islam and a moral decay during the Umayyad and Abbaside dynasties which helped the wide dissemination of corruption and moral decay among various sectors of theummah . What sort of Muslim caliphs were those whose eyes could not sleep except after listening to the music played by their male and female singers, whose nightly meetings were not complete without the presence of wine and immorality?

What type of Islamic reality is this in which a group like that has the full say? How can anyone expect the Imams (a.s.), who were the careful custodians of rights and whose responsibility was to safeguard such rights, to permit themselves and their followers to bear any responsibility in a government led by individuals whose hands were polluted with sins and accustomed to sinning?

The negative stance of the Imams was an obvious call for the nation to be aware of its Islamic mission and principles, a loud cry to wake it up from its slumber to witness the corrupt reality lived by such Islamic "caliphs" due to the reckless and corrupt behavior of those rulers and their followers who were at the helm of leading the nation.

These are some of the characteristics and qualities which provide us with some of the outlines of the portrait of Imam ar-Ridha’ (a.s.), and the picture presented here is not complete in its pristine components which represent the actual context for it, for such a task requires the researcher to rise to grasp the Imam's loftiness which is impossible to attain by any writer, and nobody can ever describe it no matter how hard he tries.


7

8