Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

References

1. Know that during the minor occultation, his representatives (wukalā’) and his deputies (nuwwāb) were a number of people who were known for their reliability, trustworthiness, and truthfulness. This can be verified by referring to credible books. His letters (tauqī`āt) and orders were transmitted through them. They demonstrated extraordinary acts and told of the unseen-by the assistance of their master, peace be on him. I will make this short by only speaking about the four most famous ones whose trustworthiness, justice, elevated position, and high status is agreed upon by all the Shias:

Al-Shaykh Abū `Amr `Uthmān b. Sa`īd al-`Amrī, may Allah the Exalted be satisfied with him: He was appointed by Imams Abū l-Ḥasan `Alī b. Muḥammad al-`Askarī and Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan b. `Alī al-`Askarī, peace be on them. He was from the Banī-Asad tribe and was known as al-`Askarī and also al-Sammān (meaning the oil trader) because he traded cooking oil as a cover-up for his activities. The two aforementioned Imams have spoken about him as well as our master Ṣāḥib al-Zamān, Allah’s blessings be on him. Al-Ṭūsī has mentioned him in his Rijāl book amongst the companions of Imam al-Hādī, peace be on him. He writes, “Uthmān b. Sa`īd al-`Amrī, whose epithet is Abū `Amr al-Sammān and who is also known as al-Zayyāt. He served him when he was merely eleven years old and was famous for his inclination towards him.” Al-Ṭūsī also mentions him as a companion of (Imam) Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan al-`Askarī, peace be on him. He says, “Highly honored, reliable, and his representative.” Yet again, he writes: “Muḥammad b. Uthmān b. Sa`īd al-`Amrī whose epithet was Abū Ja`far and his father’s epithet was Abū `Amr; both of them were the representatives of Ṣāḥib al-Zamān, peace be on him, and enjoyed a great position amongst the Shias.” The author of Tanqīḥ al-maqāl writes, “He was more majestic and famous than can mentioned.”

Abū Ja`far Muḥammad b. Uthmān b. Sa`īd al-`Amrī: When his father-Abū `Amr-died, he replaced him by [Imam] Abū Muḥammad’s order as well as the order of his own father which was commanded by the Qā’im, peace be on him. Al-Ṭūsī has narrated in al-Ghayba from Abū l-`Abbās from Hibat-Allah b. Muḥammad, from his teachers, that the Shias are unanimous in his justice, reliability, and trustworthiness because of the statements regarding his justice and the order to refer to him during the lifetime of (Imam) al-Ḥasan (al-`Askarī), peace be on him, and after his death while his father was alive. He writes, “Numerous arguments [in support of Shia] have been narrated from him and the miracles of the Imam have been manifested at his hands...”

The author of Tanqīḥ al-Maqāl writes, “His majesty, high position, and status is so famous amongst the Imāmiyya that there is no need to mention it...” He had written some books using what he had directly heard from (Imam) Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan and from the Master, peace be on them, and what he had heard from his father, Uthmān b. Sa`īd, from (Imams) Abū Muḥammad and al-Ḥasan al-Hādī, peace be on them. Al-Ṭūsī writes in al-Ghayba, “Abū Naṣr Hibat-Allah says, ‘I saw in the writings of Abū Ghālib al-Zurārī-may Allah have mercy on him and forgive him-that Abū Ja`far Muḥammad b. Uthmān al-`Amrī died in the end of (the month) Jumād al-Aulā, 305 AH. Abū Naṣr Hibat-Allah b. Muḥammad b. Aḥmad has mentioned that Abū Ja`far al-`Amrī, may Allah be satisfied with him, died in the year 304 AH. He was in charge of these affairs for almost fifty years. The people took their wealth to him and he would give them signed letters which had the same handwriting as those which they received during the lifetime of (Imam) al-Ḥasan (al-`Askarī), peace be on him. [The letters] were about the difficulties [encountered] in religious and worldly matters and replies to questions they had asked him and comprised of amazing answers. May Allah be satisfied with him and satisfy him.’”

Al-Shaykh Abū al-Qāsim al-Ḥusayn b. Rauḥ b. Abū Baḥr al-Naubakhtī, may Allah have mercy on him: He attained the position of special deputyship after Muḥammad b. Uthmān, may Allah have mercy on them. He succeeded Muḥammad b. `Uthmān by the orders of the Imam which were transmitted by Muḥammad b. `Uthmān. He was viewed by both Shias and Sunnis as one of the wisest of the people and enjoyed a great position and elevated status amongst the latter too. Muḥammad b. Uthmān had about ten close confidants; Abū l-Qāsim b. Rauḥ was amongst them but the others were closer to Muḥammad b. Uthmān than him. Amongst these, Ja`far b. Aḥmad b. Mattīl was so close to him and spent so much time in his house that the Shias had no doubt that if something happened to al-Ḥusayn b. Rauḥ, he would surely inherit his position. When the Imam appointed Abū l-Qāsim, no one denied

and they all submitted [to this order] including Ja`far b. Aḥmad b. Mattīl who showed the same attitude towards him which he had showed towards Abū Ja`far al-`Amrī. He continued this manner until he passed away. Shaykh Abū l-Qāsim died in the month of Sha`bān, 326 AH. The duration of his ambassadorship was twenty-one or twenty-two years. May Allah be satisfied with him

Al-Shaykh Abū l-Ḥasan `Alī b. Muḥammad al-Samurī: He succeeded Shaykh Abū l-Qāsim by his order and he was the last representative. With his death, the major occultation commenced and the affair was delegated to the jurists and those who possessed the traditions and sciences of the Ahl al-Bait, peace be on them. During the major occultation, the people must refer to them. This is a fact which has been established by numerous traditions-some of which have already been mentioned. Abū l-Ḥasan `Alī b. Muḥammad al-Samurī passed away in 329 AH; may Allah have mercy on him.

2. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 354-355, no. 315; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 344-345.

3. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” p. 355, no. 315; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 345.

4. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 355-356, no. 317; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 345.

5. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 355-356, no. 318. He says on page 320 that Abū Naṣr Hibat-Allah b. Muḥammad said, “Uthmān’s grave is on the western side of Baghdad at the beginning of Mayadān Street in the place known as the gate of Jibilla in the right section of the mosque of al-Darb. The grave is located in Qibla side of the mosque itself-may Allah have mercy on him. Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan-the author of this book-says, ‘I saw his grave in the aforementioned place. A wall was built on its side and the prayer-niche was built on its other side. There was a door on one side which opened into the place of the grave in a dark narrow room. We used to visit it publicly during my stay in Baghdad from the year 408 to after 430 AH. Then, the chief, Abū Manṣūr Muḥammad b. Faraj, broke down the wall, raised the grave to ground level and built a box on top of it which was beneath the roof. Whoever wanted to visit his grave would go there and do so. The neighbors of the area sought blessings by visiting it and used to say, “He was a righteous man” or “He was the son of (Imam) Ḥusayn’s nurse,” while they were ignorant of the reality and it is still the same today which is the year 447 AH.’”; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16 p. 346.

6. Al-Kāfī, chap. “The names of those who have seen him,” pp. 329-330; Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 359-361, no. 317, and chap. “Wilādat Ṣāḥib al-Amr `alayhi al-salām,” pp. 243¬-244, no. 209; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 347-348.

7. Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, p. 510, no. 41; Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” p. 361, no. 323, through his chain of narrators from `Abd-Allah b. Ja`far; al-Kharā’ij wa l-jarā’iḥ, vol. 3, p. 1112, no. 28; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 348-349; al-Iḥtijāj, vol. 2, pp. 300-301.

8. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” p. 362, no. 324; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, p. 349, no. 2.

9. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” p. 362, no. 325; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, p. 349, no. 2.

10. Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, p. 502, no. 29; Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 365-366, no. 333, from ibn Bābawayh, from a group; al-Kharā’ij wa l-jarā’iḥ, vol. 3, p. 1120, no. 36; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 351-352, under the fourth tradition; Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 3, chap. 33, p. 677, no. 74; I`lām al-warā, p. 422.

11. Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, p. 504, no. 35; al-Kharā’ij wa l-jarā’iḥ, p. 1119, no. 35; Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 7, chap. 33, pp. 314-315, no. 79; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 15, pp. 336-337, no. 63.

12. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” pp. 371-372, no. 342; Biḥār al-anwār, chap. 16, p. 355, no. 6.

13. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, chap. “Ṭarafun min akhbār al-sufarā’,” p. 388, no. 353; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 43, chap. 2, p. 37, under no. 40. He has recorded Buzl al-Harawī; al-Manāqib, vol. 3, chap. “Virtues of Fāṭimat al-Zahrā, peace be on her,” pp. 323¬-324, which

also mentions Buzl al-Hirawī. This is probably a scribal error. According to the traditionists, al-Fīrūz Ābādī, the correct name is Badīl b. Aḥmad al-Harawī.

14. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, p. 322, no. 270; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 51, p. 293, no. 1; Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 3, chap. 33, p. 692, no. 110.

15. Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, pp. 507-509, no. 37; Ghaybat al-Shaykh, pp. 321-322, no. 269, and pp. 324-326, no. 273; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 44, chap. 33, pp. 273-274, no. 1; `Ilal al-sharā’i`, vol. 1, chap. 177, pp. 241-243, no. 1; al-Iḥtijāj (Beirut), vol. 2, pp. 285-288 and pp. 471-¬473.

16. Quran 8:42.

17. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, pp. 395-396, no. 366. In some copies, the word companion instead of close has been used; Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, p. 503, no. 32; Rijāl al-Najāshī, p. 262, no. 684; Faraj al-mahmūm, p. 130; I`lām al-warā, chap. 3, sect. 2, pp. 422-423; Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 3, sect. 12, chap. 33, p. 693, no. 113, which has recorded Harthamat b. al-`Alawiyya; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, p. 361, no. 8; al-Kharā’ij wa l-jarā’iḥ, vol. 3, p. 1128, no. 45, which is a shorter account.

18. Kamāl al-dīn, vol. 2, chap. 45, p. 516, no. 44; Ghaybat al-Shaykh, p. 395, no. 365; I`lām al-warā, fourth rukn, part 2, chap. 3, sect. 2, which says: soon my followers will come; al-Kharā’ij wa l-jarā’iḥ (Mu’assisat al-Imām al-Mahdī), vol. 3, p. 1128, no. 6; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, pp. 360-361, no. 7; Jannat al-ma’wā (printed with the 53rd volume of Biḥār al-anwār), p. 318.

I say: In some copies of Kamāl al-dīn and other books, it has been written, “the complete (al-tāmma) occultation has commenced.” The original printed copy of Ghaybat al-Shaykh mentions, “[people] will come to some of my followers.” Al-Kharā’ij and Jannat al-ma’wā have recorded “and from amongst my followers some will claim,” and other books have narrated “and amongst my followers.” It might be said that this letter apparently contradicts numerous, consecutive, and definite reports that cannot be enumerated due to their abundance and are an indication that the Imam was seen and some people had the privilege of being in his presence. It also contradicts the unanimous belief of the Shias-including the belief of al-Ṣadūq, the narrator of this story-about a large group of people who have met him. The scholars have mentioned a few reasons to resolve this contradiction or to reply to this question. Six of these answers have been mentioned in Jannat al-ma’wā. One of them is what a few scholars have stated and has also been stated by al-Majlisī in Biḥār al-anwār: The context of the tradition indicates that what is meant by seeing him, is a seeing accompanied by the claim of representation and ambassadorship and the conveying of news from him to the Shias-as was the prevalent practice during the minor occultation. This probability is highly likely. Another justification is that this tradition is a single and weak narration that neither its narrator-al-Ṣadūq-nor our other Shia companions have acted upon. Hence, the many incidents which certainty is obtained from are not contradicted. Rather, some of them comprise of miracles and extraordinary deeds that could not have been performed by anyone but him.

Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 3, sect. 3, chap. 33, p. 693, no. 112 (short version); al-Iḥtijāj (Beirut), vol. 2, p. 478.

19. Ghaybat al-Shaykh, p. 394, no. 363; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 16, p. 360; I`lām al-warā, chap. 3, sect. 1, p. 417.

20. Rijāl al-Kashī (Jāmi`at al-Mashhad), p. 557, no. 1052; Ithbāt al-hudāt, vol. 7, sect. 12, chap. 33, p. 363, no. 148; Mu`jam rijāl al-ḥadīth, vol. 2, p. 49, no. 433; Biḥār al-anwār, vol. 51, chap. 15, p. 306, no. 21.

Chapter Six: His conditions and miracles during the major occultation and the stor of some of those who had the honour of meeting him

Comprised of two sections