CHAPTER IX: IMAM SAJJAD (A)
Imam Sadjdjad(a)
‘Ali Ibn Husayn Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib, known as Sadjdjad, the fourth Shi‘ites Imam, was as maintained in one narration born in 38A.H. and poisoned by Walid Ibn ‘Abd al-Malik in 94 A.H.
If the narrated date of birth be true, Imam should have evidently perceived both Imam ‘Ali and Imam Mudjtaba as well as Imam Husayn (a) and realized how Mu‘awiya had been exercising pressure on the Shi‘ite Muslims living in Iraq and other lands. In the light of the reports narrated from the event of Taff (Karbala) a number of writers concluded that Imam’s age must have been less than what reported ands his year of birth had been 48. Such reports forebode that following Imam Husayn’s martyrdom some were determined to assassinate Imam Sadjdjad (a) also, but they were impeded due to his immaturity.
Humayd Ibn Muslim, present in Karbala, said,“When Shimr came to kill Imam Sadjdjad, I dissuaded him saying he was a little boy”
.
Found in another version when ‘Ubayd Allah decided to murder Imam Sadjdjad (a), he commanded to examine the signs of his maturity. After they attested to it, he issued the verdict of his murder. Notwithstanding, Imam managed to change his mind by saying him“If you claim that you are from among the Prophte’s kins (as Abu Sufyan’s grandson), you are obliged to let a man accompany these women to Medina”
.
It is also quoted that Zaynab (a) averted Imam Sadjdjad’s murder saying“kill me first if you want to kill him”
.
Enumerating the Umayya atrocities, Djahi¨ has alluded to their irreverence about Imam Sadjdjad (a) by checking the signs of his maturity after the event of Karbala.
Supposing the narration true
, Imam should have been younger since the maximum age of maturity was fifteen necessitated by the current situation.
Although such kinds of reports are recorded in various sources, there exists many a proof of hand which denies them. First, the renowned historians have recorded Imam’s birth in 38, based on which Imam had been twenty-three years of age in the course of Karbala event. Secondly, it had by not means been ignored by the expert historians, from the very beginning they contradicted the common narration the genuineness of which had been confirmed and come into question however.
Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar Waqidi, a distinguished narrator of the Sunnis, subsequent to a quotation from Imam Sadiq (a) as saying“‘Ali Ibn Husayn (a) departed in 58”
added that this utterance vindicated that while 23 or 24, Imam Sadjdjad (a) had been with his father in Karbala and those describing him under age are wrong. Imam was seriously ill in Karbala; therefore, he was not able to participate in the war. How could he ever be immature whereas his son, Abu Dja‘far Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Baqir, had met Djabir Ibn ‘Abd Allah Ansari and quoted hadiths from him. Djabir had passed away in 78 A.H.
Thirdly, the way of Imam Sadjdjad’s behaving towards ‘Ubayd Allah Ibn Ziyad and even Yazid Ibn Abi Sufyan corroborates that he had been old enough and to discuss his maturity or immaturity in Karbala looked in vain. The scene set for his delivering sermons on the pulpit, in its turn, stemmed from his age as well. Such a ground could have never been prepared by Yazid for an individual whose maturity was open to question.
Fourthly, with a glance at numerous narrations about Imam Baqir’s birth in historical books, it can be observed that he had been present in Karbala as a four-year old boy. No one has declared it untrue. If assenting these reports, there is no alternative but admitting the common narration with a two-year-or-so discrepancy.
Three versions that certain figures like Biyhaqi have recorded telling Imam’s date of birth (33, 36 and 38) are not unconnected to that mentioned above. The former was reported by Ibn ‘Asakir.
Zuhri also has confirmed that ‘Ali Ibn Husayn was beside his father in Karbala at the age of twenty-three.
Another controversial issue the analysis where of would bear fruitful results is the accurate name and pedigree of Imam Sadjdjad’s mother. Regretfully, after all extensive studies that a number of writers have done in this respect, it is not still definite. The notion that his mother had been one of Sassanids princesses was recently denied lest the anti-Shi‘ite Muslims as a consequence judge that the spread of Shi‘ism in Iran had been due to the association of Imam’s lineage with the Sassanids through Yazdgard III’s daughter who has been alleged to be Imam Sadjdjad’s mother. Professor Shahidi, in his foregoing book, has cited and criticized most of these narrations. Further, there are few quotations suggesting that she be“Umm Walad”
(a bondswoman whose husband was not a bondsman). In spite of all controversies about the reports or their incompatibility with the reports of the contests and so forth, the genuine narration is definitively worthy and is mentioned in the Shi‘ites books belonging to the ancient times such as Waq‘a Siffin, Tarikh Ya‘qubi and Basa’ir al-Daradjat, all written in the third century. A hadith also has been quoted from Imam Sadiq(a) in Kafi
as reported by Qadi Nu‘man in the fourth century as well.
Acknowledging that there does exist skepticism, we shall examine the illusory link between this issue and the spread of Shi‘ism properly later.
Consistent with what the Shi‘ites hadith-narrators have narrated, Imam Sadjdjad (a) is the successor of his father, Husayn Ibn ‘Ali (a). These are narrated by Shiykh Kulayni in Kafi and Shiykh Hurr ‘Amili in Ithbat al-Hudat, etc. It can also be detected from the Prophet’s hadiths naming the Shi‘ites Imams. Heedless of it, approving Imam Sadjdjad (a) in Shi‘ites community as well as his Imama throughout history is an original proof itself. The one and the only mistrust at that critical point prevailing a small number of Ahl al-Bayt’s supporters was Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya’s Imamate which will be discussed in berries later. As specified by Shi‘ites hadiths, the Prophet’s sword, armor and so on should be with Imams and their being with Imam Sadjdjad was validated even in Sunnites books.
The time at which Imam Sadjdjad lived was a special period that all religious values were exposed to the Umayya distortin and Medina residents, one of the religious centers, were all compelled to swear allegiance to Yazid like his slaves. Islamic commandments had turned into a plaything for people such as Ibn Ziyad, Hadjdjadj and ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Marwan. In Hadjdjadj’s view, ‘Abd al-Malik was superior to Allah’s Messenger (s)! Unlike Islamic narrations, he extorted“Djizya”
(poll-tax) from Muslims and with a slight calumny he handed over them to the executioners.
In the shadow of such rule it was inevitable that the less people’s religious training was elevated, the more disvalues were revived. Under those circumstances, Imam Sadjdjad (a) was only a worshipper and his most socially penetrating impact on establishing a link between people and Allah was solely through Du‘a (prayer). So influential a characteristic had he that people were enamored of him. A large number of knowledge-seekers were the narrators of his hadiths and availed themselves of his overflowing spring emanated from the Prophet and ‘Ali’s boundless body of knowledge. Describing Imam’s personality, Muhammad Ibn Sa‘d, Sunnites historian and scholar, had said, كان علي بن الحسين ثقة مأمونا كثير الحديث عالياً رفيعاً ورعاً
“‘Ali Ibn Husayn, trustworthy, said many hadiths. He was magnanimous, superior and pious.”
In his thesis about the reliability of this unique narration, Shafi‘i had written, وجدت علي بن الحسين - وهو أفقه أهل المدينة - يعوّل علي خبر الواحد
“‘Ali Ibn Husayn who was the only outstanding religious jurisprudent in Medina relied upon this unique narration.”
Although Ibn Shahab Zuhri was from the Umayya kins and regardless of the dispute existing between the Umayya and Shi‘ite Muslims, he was among the scholars at Imam Sadjdjad’s time. Getting zealously the most out of Imam’s presence, he had praised him in many sentences. In a letter written by Imam, Zuhri was advised to reconsider his position as an instrument for the Umayya sovereignty.
Once he was reproached by Imam Sadjdjad for his insultation to ‘Ali Ibn Abi Talib (s)
; however, he was his narrator and his narrations have been recorded in various books.
Additionally he was enamored with Imam Sadjdjad’s worshipping and purity. As reported, كان الزهري إذا ذكر علي بن الحسين يبكي ويقول: زين العابدين
“As soon as Zuhri heard the name of ‘Ali Ibn Husayn, he wept and said, Zayn al-‘Abidin the worshippers’ beauty.”
He was quoted as saying, علي بن الحسين أعظم الناس منّة عليّ
“‘Ali Ibn Husayn was the most generous of all people.”
ما رأيت أحداً أفقه من علي بن الحسين
“I have seen no one being more erudite than ‘Ali Ibn Husayn.”
His commendation for Imam Sadjdjad (a) was to the extent that some of the Marwanids told him, يا زهري! مافعل نبيّك يعني علي بن الحسين
“O Zuhri! What has your Prophet (‘Ali Ibn Husayn) done for you?”
Abu Hazim, another hadith-narrator, had said, ما رأيت هاشمياً أفضل من علي بن الحسين ولا أفقه منه
“I have seen no one from the Hashimites whose Knowledge and jurisprudence be higher than those of ‘Ali Ibn Husayn.”
It is quoted from Djahi¨ as stating,“Concerning ‘Ali Ibn Husayn’s characteristic, the Shi‘ite Muslims, schismatics, the Kharidjites were all unanimous and not a single one of those was sceptical about his superiority over others”
.
As it will be discerned later, the most decisive reason for Imam’s popularity with the people was his eloquent sentences within the framework of supplication engrossing people.
Sa‘id Ibn Musayyib, an eminent hadith-narrator, described Imam Sadjdjad (a), ما رأيت أورع من علي بن الحسين
“I have never seen one more pious than ‘Ali Ibn Husayn so far.”
During his lifetime, Imam was called“‘Ali al-Khayr”
(example of goodness),“‘Ali al-Aqharr (outstanding ‘Ali) and “‘Ali al-‘Abid”
(Worshipper).
At that time Malik Ibn Anas was of this belief that there existed no one like Imam Sadjdjad in the Prophet’s Ahl al-Bayt.
Ibn Abi l-Hadid had said, كان علي بن الحسين غاية في العبادة
“‘Ali Ibn Husayn was the highest in worshipping.”
On account of Imam’s too many prostrations as well as of which mark on his forehead he was called“Dhi l-Thafanat”
(the Owner of Calluses).
Also, Ibn Hibban had described Imam as follows, وكان من أفاضل بني هاشم من فقهاء المدينة وعبادهم … يقال علي بن الحسين سيد العابدين في ذلك الزمان
“He was one of the most learned of the Hashimites, one of the jurisprudents and worshippers of Medina … it is said that he was the master of worshippers at that time.”
Abu Zuhra also said, فعليّ زين العابدين كان إمام المدينة نبلاً وعلمًا
“‘Ali Zayn al-‘Abidin was Imam of Medina from the viewpoint of rank and knowledge.”
Reportedly, when Imam made ablution before prayer, he was noticed with a pale complexion. After being inquired for the reason, he replied, أتدرون بين يدي من أريداً أن أقوم
“Do you know before whom I am going to stand?”
It is recounted that at prayer time Imam began shivering while turning pale. In his answer to the question for its ground, he stated, اني أريد الوقوف بين يدي ملك عظيم
“I want to stand in front of the Great King.”
Heeded to nothing while he was engaged in performing prayers. Once his child broke his arm. He was crying severely. An orthopedist was called to set the bone. Later, after finding the child with his arm hung from his neck, Imam realized the happening after all.
Zamakhshari has narrated that when ‘Ali Ibn Husayn immersed his arm to make ablution, ثم رفع رأسه الى السماء والقمر والكواكب، ثم جعل يفكّر في خلقها حتي أصبح وأذن المؤدن ويده في الماء“He raised his head staring at the sky, the moon and stars and pondering over as long as morning appeared and the Mu’adhdhin started calling to prayer while his arm was still in water.”
When his servant was questioned about him, she said,“Never ever did I take him food during the day nor did I prepare bed for him at nights.”
It is narrated that while he was busy with his prayers, a snake approached him. The snake crept along through Imam’s two feet but not a slight move or change of complexion was noticed.
In giving alms and aiding the underprivileged he was proverbial. It was after his martyrdom when it revealed that a hundred families had been living on his alms and charity.
Imam Baqir (a) has been quoted as saying that his father, Imam Sadjdjad (a), had been carrying food on his back at dead of night for the destitute stressing that charity at night-time mitigates Allah’s wrath.
People’s affection for him beggared description. Narratedly, the Qur’an reciters under on conditions set out to Mecca unless Imam Sadjdjad came and one thousand people on horseback followed him.
Sumptuously dressed, he left home but promptly returned and asked to bring his previous robe pointing out,“As though I am not ‘Ali Ibn Husayn.”
While he was passing the streets in Medina on horseback, not once did he ever warn“let me through”
in view of the fact that he believed that the route was communal and he was never entitled to outrun.
His son, Imam Baqir, was cited as saying,“My father sacrificed his properties entirely for Allah’s sake twice”
.
At the moment of breathing his last, Muhammad Ibn Usama Ibn Zayd was beside him. Muhammad was shedding tears when Imam asked the why.
“I am 15000 dhms in debt”
, responded Muhammad.
“Do not agitate yourself, I pay it”
, Imam stated.
All of these mentioned points look a drop from the ocean of Imam Sadjdjad’s virtues.
Imam Sadjdjad and Shi‘ite Muslims
On the last day of the event of Karbala the Shi‘ites’s political and ideological position was in a tragic situation both qualitatively and quantitatively. Kufa which had always been considered the center of Shi‘ites tendencies had turned into a base for suppressing them. All the vertical Shi‘ite Muslims of Imam Husayn having been either in Medina, or in Mecca or those from Kufa who could flourish to join Imam were martyred in Karbala. Although there were some living in Kufa, they could in no way express themselves under the appalling circumstances exercised by Ibn Ziyad. Karbala was as a matter of fact a debacle for the Shi‘ite Muslims psychologically. What was seemingly publicized was that the Shi‘ite Muslims could no longer raise their heads aloft. A group of Ahl al-Bayt headed by Imam Husayn had achieved martyrdom and the only remainng son from Imam Husayn and Fatima’s issue was no one but Imam Sadjdjad who was not famed at that time. Imam Husayn’s eldest son, ‘Ali Akbar, haf also been martyred in particular. Imam Sadjdjad’s life in Medina and being distant from Iraq did never allow opportunities to be provided for him to lead the Shi‘ite Muslims in Kufa.
In such a status which Shi‘ites basis was determinedly targeted. Imam Sadjdjad had to resume from Zero and absorb people towards Ahl al-Bayt, Imam could successfully reach many achievements, however.
The achievements have been verified in history. Imam Sadjdjad could not only breath new life into the Shi‘ite Muslims but also lay the foundations for both Imam Baqir’s and Imam Sadiq’s future activities. It has been evidenced by history that he, during his thirty-four-year activity, extricated the Shi‘ite Muslims from the thorniest periods of their lives, the period which had nothing save Shi‘ite Muslims’ suppression by the Umayya and Ibn Zubayr. Hadjdjadj’s twenty-year sovereignty in Iraq together with ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Marwan’s dominance of the thorough Islamic realm had concentrated on suppressing the Shi‘ite Muslims and somewhere else suppressing other Umayyads opponents including Kharidjites and such insurgents as ‘Abd al-Rahman Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ash‘ath. Hearing the term of Shi‘ites was far more irritating than the term of disbeliever for Hadjdjadj.
During these years, two Shi‘ites movements were waged in Iraq either of which-despite the temporary victory of one-was defeated. Subsequently the Shi‘ite Muslims were with all might put under the threat of murder, torture and imprisonment by the Umayya. The penitents one of the movements was that of Tawwabin led by Sulayman Ibn Surad Khuza‘i with a small number of the renowned Shi‘ite Muslims of Kufa that we already discussed. It is alleged that Tawwabin had yielded to ‘Ali Ibn Husayn’s Imama.
We could find no proof for the allegation in primary sources. What is worth consideration is that as a rule Tawwabin had been set to entrust Imama to Ahl al-Bayt if succeeded and naturally there existed no one from Fatima’s issue but ‘Ali Ibn Husayn (a). Not a report has been traced in history whether they were precisely of this opinion or not. It appears that no specific political relation between Imam Sadjdjad and Tawwabin had been established. Nevertheless, whatever had given Shi‘ites spirit to the movement was the active participation of the notable Shi‘ite Muslims of Kufa as well as its sentimental nature, that is, repenting for not defending Husayn Ibn ‘Ali and getting martyred as the only way for the acceptance of their repentance. Nowhere of the movement was the name of Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya mentioned.
Their poletical blunder was assessing not the status quo, abandoning Kufa and leaving himself to the accidents. Believing that the leader of the movement was incapable of estimating military and political issues, not only Mukhtar did by no means collaborate but he also hindered a number of Shi‘ite Muslims to back the movement.
Imam Sadjdjad’s association with the second movement, namely Mukhtar’s movement was as vague as the former one. Such a connection bore numerous troubles both form the viewpoints of politics and ideology. It was said that after attaining support from the Shi‘ite Muslims in Kufa, Mukhtar pleaded to ‘Ali Ibn Husayn (a) for cooperation but Imam showed no delight.
By taking Imam’s abiding policy into account, the standing adopted looked reasonable. Later than the event in Karbala, Imam had well perceived that reviving such a dead community through securing the leadership was beyond the bounds of practicability, Besides, implicating in another political movement with the presence of external powers might have preceded many a peril which was not worth risking at all. By this reason, the entity of Imam’s movement throughout his Imamate elucidated that his was never merely a political one though in many cases secession from politics exactly denoted a certain political activity.
And the ideological aspect of the adventure commenced when Mukhtar asked for Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya’s assistance and advocacy. He consented but not officially. From then on, it was rumored that Ibn Hanafiyya’s Imamate was accepted amongst the Iraqi Shi‘ite Muslims. Although this notion was not corroborated, later when a sect named the Kissanids was founded, the story began from the time of Mukhtar.
With the infiltration of the Exaggerators’ theories into the Shi‘ites nation in Kufa, Mukhtar also was subject to accusation later. It was rumored that Mukhtar had played an influential role in emerging the Exaggerators. Based on noncount justifications, referring to which does not seem convenient here and have been discussed elsewhere, all of these issues even that a sect named the Kissanids believed in Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya’s Imamate and Mahdavitism are open to doubt. Notwithstanding, regarding Imam Sadjdjad’s position-taking against the Exaggerators there is evidence available. It was the predominant deviation among Iraqi Shi‘ite Muslims which compelled Imam to refrain from taking a transparent stance and setting up a direct link with them.
Imam Sadjdjad (a) addressed a group of Iraqis saying, أحبونا حبّ الاسلام ولا ترفعونا فوق حدِّنا
“Adore us for the sake of Islam but never promote us higher than we deserve.”
Somewhere else, أحبونا حبَّ الإسلام ولا تحبُّونا حبَّ الأصنام
“Adore us for the sake of Islam but never idolatize us.”
Abu Khalid Kabuli had recounted that he had heard Imam Sadjdjad (a) saying, إن قوماً من شيعتنا سيُحبّونا حتى يقولوا فينا ما قالت اليهود في عزير وما قالتِ النصاري في عيسى بن مريم، فلا هم منّا ولا نحن منهم
“Some of our Shi‘ite Muslims go to extremes in adoring us to the extent that they repeat what the Jews and the Christians had declared about Ezra and Jesus Christ saying, “Neither are we from them nor are they from us”
In accordance with Shi‘ites sources, Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya was on no accounts a misled one and had assented Imam Sadjdjad’s Imama. In order as a consequence to verify that Ibn Hanafiyya had indeed introduced himself as an Imam a few questions would be posed and solutions would be presumed that he had taken this action with the aid of Imam to keep Imam away although no historical proof supports such an assumption.
What merits to be borne in mind is that it beggars belief that Imam Sadjdjad (a) had uttered such words about Mukhtar, يكذب على الله وعلى رسوله
“He attributes false things to Allah and the Prophet.”
Especially, when Mukhtar had sent ‘Ubayd Allah’s head to him, he had averred, جزى الله المختار خيراً
“May Allah award Mukhtar the best!”
Narratedly at that time, لم يبق من بني هاشم أحد الا قام بخطبة فيالثناء على المختار وجميل القول فيه
“There was no one from the Hashimites who did not rise and admire Mukhtar.”
Quoted from Imam Baqir was, لا تسبّوا المختار فأنه قتل قتلتنا وطلب ثأرنا وزوج أراملنا وقسم فينا المال على العسرة
“Insult not Mukhtar for he has killed our assassins, has had our orphans marry and has allotted properties to us when in trouble.”
And in an answer to the question of Mukhtar’s son, he described his position about Mukhtar as positive.
As discussed before, Mukhtar’s movement did not politically last long and was suppressed by Ibn Zubayr followers in 67 AH. However, it had an impact on stimulating and perpetuating Shi‘ites emotions in Kufa and on motivating Mawali to take part in political activities.
Due to the aforesaid deviation and even unlike Ibn Hanafiyya’s possible wish, some were ambivalent whom to choose as an Imam. Qasim Ibn ‘Awf, one of Imam Sadjdjad’s disciples, who had initially been hesitant whether to choose ‘Ali Ibn Husayn or Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya ultimately joined Imam Sadjdjad as confessed by himeslf.
According to Kashshi, Abu Hamza Thumali and Farat Ibn Ahnaf had been among his disciples.
Although Sa‘id Ibn Musayyib was controversial to be among them, he had apparently been ruling in accordance with the Sunnism. In Ridjal, Kashshi has treated Sa‘id’s position as disentanglement from Hadjdjadj.
His veneration for Imam, at all events, is without a shadow of a doubt and availing himself of Imam’s presence scientifically and ethically is confirmed. But he did not attend Imam’s funeral ceremony and as a result was objected to.
Aside from these individuals, there had been a number deemed steadfast Shi‘ite Muslims on the report of Shi‘ites sources. At the starting-point there had been only few with Imam such as Sa‘id Ibn Djubayr, Sa‘id Ibn Musayyib, Muhammad Ibn Djubayr Ibn Mut‘im, Yahya Ibn Umm al-Tawil and Abu Khalid al-Kabuli.
The number of Imam Sadjdjad’s disciples was said 173 by Shiykh al-Ta’ifa.
Anyhow Imam could vastly contribute to Shi‘ism eternity and its dissemination. His style in Islamic jurisprudence domain was narrating the Holy Prophet’s hadiths through ‘Ali (a). Only were these hadiths authentic in Shi‘ite Muslims’ sight. By the same token, Shi‘ites managed to take his first strides in Islamic jurisprudence averse to the existing deviations; nontheless, the main phase thereof procrastinated.
While calling for prayer (Adhan), Imam Sadjdjad inserted the sentence of, حيّ علي خيرالعمل“Hasten to practice good deeds.”
When objections raised, he stated that Adhan had been that form since the inception.
Seceding from Iraqi deviations culminated in maintaining the doctrinal bases of Shi‘ism against deviations. In spite of Imam’s serious endeavor, which, of course, led to the perpetual Shi‘ism, Medina could never ever be disposed to Shi‘ites growth in the light of its deviations created from the Early Islamic Era as well as its incitement against Shites. Imam Sadjdjad himself had asserted that their vertical devotees both in Mecca and Medina had not exceeded twenty people.
Many lived in Iraq who were their enthusiasts, however.
Imam’s Encounter with the Umayyads
Imam’s ever-first encounter with the Umayya rulers after Karbala event was with ‘Ubayd Allah Ibn Ziyad. Ibn Ziyad asked his name.
Imam replied,“This is ‘Ali”
.
“Did Allah kill not ‘Ali Ibn Husayn?”
Ibn Ziyad asked surprisingly.
“I had a brother whom people killed”
, responded Imam.
“But Allah did kill him”
, Ibn Ziyad added.
Imam Sadjdjad stated, اللَّهُ يَتَوَفَّى الْأَنْفُسَ حِينَ مَوْتِهَا .
Concluding to murder Imam, Ibn Ziyad was heroicly stopped by Zaynab (a).
Yazid also met him in Damascus
and reproached him. In an excellent sermon, Imam introduced himself and his family addressing the audience in the mosque. People who had for a long time been ignorantly influenced by the Umayya propagation and were not in the slightest acquainted with the Prophet’s household became awakened somewhat by his sermon. Yazid had to interrupt Imam, demagogically imputed the wickedness to Ibn Ziyad and respectfully saw off ‘Ali Ibn Husayn along with other captives of Karbala to Medina. Among the noteworthy points in Imam’s sermon was that he introduced his father, his family and himself as the Prophet’s descendants whereas both Mu‘awiya and the Umayya have been constantly striving to inroduce them ‘Ali’s descendants not the Holy Prophet’s.
A while after the event in Karbala, revolting against the Umayya, the people of Medina organized the riot of Harra, moreover. The leadership of the riot lay with ‘Abd Allah Ibn Han¨ala, Aliyas Ghasil al-Mala’ika whose character was anti-Umayyads and anti-Yazid and whose life style was non-Islamic. Imam Sadjdjad’s as well as others’ position from the Hashimites was not positive; consequently, they abandoned the town with a number of their families. In Imam’s view, the aforementioned movement had not merely a Shi‘ites nature but was absolutely in line with Ibn Zubayr’s intent, someone who had been among those occasioning the war of Djamal. Since Imam’s any standing as a Shi‘ites leader could precede the riskiest consequence for the Shi‘ite Muslims, he did not involve himself.
Besides, when people had expelled the Umayyads, Imam’s manliness entailed to give asylum to Marwan Ibn Hakam’s wife at his request. Tabari has written that Imam’s old friendship with Marwan accounted for Imam’s action.
It is in actual fact a barefaced lie. At that age and under those circumstances that his father and forefather had been in conflict with this reign, Imam’s intimacy with Marwan as the most wretched element among the Umayyads was out of the question in a real sense of word. Marwan was the one who from the outset of securing allegiance in Medina had coerced the governor to either force Imam Husayn to swear allegiance or take his life. Imam’s reaction was a sportsmanlike answer to the Umayyads’ foulness so that history could compare the conducts.
After Muslim Ibn ‘Uqba, Aliyas Musraf suppressed the movement of Medina people and committed the greatest atrocities during the Umayya age, he acted moderately towards ‘Ali Ibn Husayn due to his absence in the movement. Muslim secured allegiance from people in a way that they know themselves Yazid’s slaves; not withstanding, securing allegiance from ‘Ali Ibn Husayn was quite normal.
Prior to Imam’s entry, Muslim was cursing Imam and his forebear. But on Imam’s arrival, he behaved calmly.
When Muslim was asked for his change subsequent to Imam’s departure, he responded, ما كان ذلك لرأي منّي لقد ملیء قلبي منه رعباَ
“My second conduct was not my wish. Fear had fully permeated into my heart.”
Heedless of the fact that Imam’s position-taking ought to be interpreted by considering the political state, military oppositions and the establishment of organizations, it had been the current situation which necessitated any Imam’s responsibility
at any juncture. Every politically rational man is cognizant that the approaches adopted vary in various situations. As examined history evidences how Imam Sadjdjad(a) reserved and proliferated Shi‘ism for the future activites.
As far as the relations between the ‘Alawites and the Umayya were concerned, Imam was vehemently suspected by them and as Imam’s slight movement could bare negative outcomes, he naturally believed that action-taking was not worth. One of the most significant religious-political principles by using which Imam spent his political life was Taqiyya (precautionary dissimulation). It shielded the Shi‘ite Muslims’ lives throughout history as pointed out by Imam over and over. Yet, in order to undermine the Shi‘ite Muslims, a group, not in need of manipulating it, denied it strongly although it had been straightforwardly stipulated in Holy Qur’an. The Sunnis on account of being in power required not Taqiyya and only for accusing the Shi‘ite Muslims did they delete it from among the incontrovertible Islamic and Fiqhi commandments.
In a hadith, Imam Sadjdjad has stated that anyone not enjoining good and forbidding evil is like one who has set the divine Book aside and turned his back on it unless he follows Taqiyya. He was asked what Taqiyya was. He answered, يخاف جباراَ عنيداَ يخاف أن يفرط عليه أو أن يطغى
“To fear from a cruel ruler to kill him or oppress him.”
Believing in Taqiyya as a Qur’anic principle was in terms of Islamic jurisprudence accentuated more by Imams who had to practice it. Imam Sadjdjad who lived an exceedingly difficult life had no other alternative but Taqiyya. It was fundamentally Taqiyya which safeguarded Shi‘ism at that time, what of which Kharidjites, the extremists, did not avail themselves and as a result were struck hard. Narratedly, meeting Imam, someone asked him how he spent his life.
Imam responded,“We pass the time among our people as Israelites were among the Pharaoh’s people. They kill our children and take our women as bondwomen. People get nearer to our foes by insulting our lord. If Quraysh prides itself on having Muhammad before other Arabs and if Arabs consider themselves superior to non-Arabs for having Muhammad (s) and they have approved such a virtue for Arabs and Quraysh, we, Ahl al-Bayt, should be proud of ourselves before Quraysh because Muhammad has been from among us. Yet, they usurped our rights and this is the way our time goes by”
.
The narrator added that Imam was speaking in a way that only those nearby be able to hear him.
Overall, Imam’s lenience with the Umayya provided a free life in Medina for Imam and less was he center of attention on the part of the opponents. Furthermore it manifested Imam’s scientific dimention in reserving the religion. The great admiration made by a Sunnites scholar about him is a proof. Were Imam involved in politics, no one could describe this aspect of Imam’s character.
Imam Sadjdjad’s Profiting from Du‘a (Prayer)
When the community was deviated, the spirit of comfort-loving and worldliness prevailed, it was confined by political, ethical and social corruption and when there was no opening to breathe politically, Imam Sadjdjad could partially express his beliefs throgh prayer and reactivate the nation to pay heed to insight and worship. Although, seemingly, the main aim within the prayers had been insight and worship, in regard with the phrases it can be claimed that people could have perceived the political concepts between the lines.
Al-Sahifa al-Sadjdjadiyya including more than fifty prayers is only a part of Imam Sadjdjad’s compiled prayers. The number of the collections inclusive of his prayers is six with the above mentioned one. The prayers inside some of them exceed 180.
These prayers had been used by the Sunnis in addition to the Shi‘ite Muslims,
so it can be inferred how influential they had been at that time. Among all Shi‘ites Imams, Imam Sadjdjad (a) is more famous for his prayers.
Within the prayers there is a phrase repeatedly used and rarely can a prayer be found excluding it. It is, صلوات بر محمد وآل محمد“Peace be to Muhammad and his progeny.”
Basically it is an indication of genuine prayers. Once naming a baby ‘Ali was decried and the Umayya could execute nothing without insulting ‘Ali (a),
observing such a phrase appeared virtuous.
Such phrases as, محمد وآله الطيبين الطاهرين الاخيار الانجبين
“Muhammad and his decent, clean, chosen and honored descendants.”
Imam’s insistence on uniting Muhammad and his descendants was what Allah had emphasized and it is of utmost importance for expressing Shi‘ites beliefs. Previous to narrating contents of some of his prayers it looks proper to refer to a hadith on consolidating the link between Muhammad and his Household.
Imam Sadjdjad has stated, “It is incumbent upon a learned to say Salawat to Allah’s Prophet. Allah has joined us to him as well. If anyone say Salawat for the Prophet but excludes us, not only does he make it imperfect but also he disobeys Allah.
“The union of Muhammad and his Household can substantially affect people’s stance on the Holy Prophet’s household.
The issue of Imamate is one of the central religious-political contents of al-Sahifa. The concept of Imama as a Shi‘ites concept depicts the divine aspects of infallibility along with profiting from the prophets’ body of knowledge in general and that of the holy Prophet in particular in addition to its superiority over caliphate and leadership.
We show some examples, ربّ صلّ على أطائب اهل بيته الذين اخترتهم لأمرك وجعلتم خزنة علمك وحفظة دينك وخلفائك في أرضك وحججك على عبادك وطهرّتّهم من الرجس والدّنس تطهيراً بارادتك وجعلتهم الوسيلة اليك والمسلك الى جنّتك
“O Lord! Bless those pure from Muhammad’s progeny, those whom Thou have chosen for ruling and those whom Thou have designated as Thy depositaries of science and guards of Thy religion. Thou created tem as Thy caliphs and proof for Thy servants on the earth. Thou not only cleansed them from any impurity of Thy own volition, but also determined them as a vehicle for reaching Thee and the abiding Heaven.”
اللّهم انّ هذا المقام لخلفائك وأصفيائك وموضع أمنائك في الدّرجة الّتي اختصصتهم بها قد ابتزوها… حتى عاد صفوتك وخلفائك مغلوبين، مقهورين مبتزّين … أللهم العن أعدائهم من الاوّلين والاخرين ومن رضي بفعالهم وأشياعهم وأتباعهم
“O Allah! Caliphate does solely belong to Thy caliphs, the chosen from creatures. The position Thou had assigned for Thy Trustee in sublime ranks was usurped by others… until Thy caliphs and chosen ones were vanquished by the oppressors and their rights were disregarded. O my Lord! Thy malediction be upon their enemies from the beginning to the end, upon those gratified with this oppression and upon their followers.”
وصلّ على خيرتك اللّهم من خلقك محمّد وعترته الصّفوةّ من بريّتك الطّاهرين واجعلنا لهم سامعين ومطيعين كما أمرت اللهّم اجعلنی من أهل التّوحيد والايمان بك والتّصديق برسولک والائمة الّذين حتمت طاعتهم
“O Lord! Bless the best creature of all, Muhammad, and his chosen kinfolks. Make us obedient to them as Thou have commanded. O Lord! Make me one of the believers of the Prophet and Imams, those whose obedience Thou have ordered.”
اللّهم انّك ايّدت دينك في كلّ أوان بامام أقمته علماَ لعبادك ومناراً في بلادك بعد ان وصلت حبله بحبلك وجعلته الذّريعة الي رضوانك وافترضت طاعته وحذرت معصيته وأمرت بامتثال أوامره والانتهاء الي نهيه وأن لا يتقدّمه متقدّم ولا يتأخّر عنه متأخّر فهو عصمة للائذين وكهف المؤمنين وعروة المتمسكين وبهاء العالمين ….
وأقم به كتابك وحدودك وشرائعك وسنن رسولك صلواتك اللّه عليه واله وأحي به ما أماته الظّالمون من معالم دينك وأجل به صداء الجور عن طريقتك وابن به الضّراء من سبيلك وأزل به النّاکبين عن صراطك وأمحق به بغاة قصدك عوجاَ … واجعلنا له سامعين مطيعين
“O Lord! At any time Thou have appointed an Imam as a flag and a guidance lamp for Thy servants on the earth. Through establishing a direct link between Thyself and him, choosing him a way far drawing Thy gratification, enjoining all to obey his commands and prohibiting all from disobeying him, Thou did approve Thy religion. He is an Imam over whom no one has priority and from whom no one has the right to separate. An Imam for whom Thou have arranged a secure place for approaching Thee is he. Thou have bestowed firm faith on him who resorts Thy leading and favor and bestowed a highest honor in the world as he is a refuge for the believers… O Lord! Safeguard Thy book, Islamic limits, religious laws and Thy Prophet’s Sunna by him, revive any of Thy religious tenets which the oppressor dissolved by him and obliterate any corruption or deviation in Thy straight path by him. Obviate the dangers in Thy way by him, make us obedient to him and successful in satisfying him.”
It can be evidently inferred from the sentences above that Imam’s determination had been disseminating Shi‘ites beliefs through the concept of Imama as the most crucial in Shi‘ism. Similar contents admiring Ahl al-Bayt from Nahdj al-Balagha had been presented in the discussion about Imam ‘Ali’s caliphate.
As referred to the domain of the prayers is incredredibly vast and contains other aims such as devotional, intellectual and political. Brining an intellectual example would be appropriate here. Irbili recounted that while Imam Sadjdjad was in the Prophet’s mosque in Medina he noticed that a group having a doctrinal discussion likened Allah to his creature. Imam who was incensed, stood up, went to the Prophet’s grave and began praying from which the content of negating comparison could be deduced. Shedding tears he was praying,
الهي قد بدت قدرتك ولم تبد هيئتك فجهلوك وقدّروك بالتقدير على غير ما انت به فشبّهوك وأنا بريء يا الهي من الذّين بالتّشبيه طلبوك …
“O my Allah! Thy might is revealed. They do not appreciate Thee. They ordain despite what Thou have foreordained. They compare Thee with mankind while I loathe it. O my Allah! Who are those who seek Thee with comparison?”
One of the Imam’s actions at different times was to make people acquainted with the Prophet’s Household about whom all the rights and virtues were specified in Qur’an and Sunna. In Damascus the Umayya introduced themselves the Holy Prophet’s Household as in Hidjaz some of the Prophet’s wives did so. Since his wives died one after another and left no child, the existence of Ahl al-Bayt was rendered null and void. And now no one but Fatima’s offspring was remained. Making them known was requisite especially in as much as the incidents after the Prophet’s departure had had them keep silent in political scenes. Imam Sadjdjad introduced the household when he was taken to Damascus and it was in his famous sermon as confirmed by a number of historical records.
In this regard, we present a narration.
و أتي بحرم رسول اللّه صلى الله عليه وآله حتي دخلوا مدينة دمشق من باب يقال له I توماء»، ثم أتي بهم حتى وقفوا علي درج باب المسجد حيث يقام السبي واذا الشيخ قد أقبل حتى دنا منهم وقال, الحمد لله الذي قتلكم وأهلككم وأراح الرجال من سطوتكم وأمكن أميرالمؤمنين منكم. فقال له علي بن الحسين, يا شيخ! هل قرأت القرآن؟ قال: نعم قد قرأته، قال: فعرفت هذه الاية: قل لاأسئلكم اجراً الا المودّة في القربى؟ قال الشيخ: نعم. فقال علي بن الحسين: فنحن القربى يا شيخ، قال: هل قرأت في سورة بني اسرائيل: وآت ذا القربي حقه؟ قال الشيخ: قد قرأت ذلك، فقال علي: نحن القربى يا شيخ. وهل قرأت هذه الاية I واعلموا أنما غنمتم من شيء فان لله خمسه وللرسول ولذي القربى، قال الشيخ: قد قرأت ذلك، فقال علي: فنحن ذو القربى يا شيخ. ولكن هل قرأت هذه الايه: انما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيراً، قال الشيخ: قد قرأت ذلك. قال علي: فنحن اهل البيت الذي خصنا بآية الطهارة. فبقي الشيخ ساعة ساكتاً نادماً علي ما تكلّمه؛ ثم رفع رأسه الي السماء وقال: اللهم اني تائب اليك في ما تكلمته ومن بعض هولاء القوم، اللهم اني أبرء اليك من عدّو محمد وآل محمد
The Prophet’s Household were brought. They were entered Damascus through a door called“Tuma’’”
They stood by the mosque door with other captives.
An old man approached them and said,“I offer my appreciation to Allah who killed you and let people relieve and Amir al-Mu’minin Yazid overcame you”
.
‘Ali Ibn Husayn asked him,“Man, have you ever recited Qur’an?”
“Sure, I have”
the old man answered.
“Have you ever seen the verse of Say, I do not ask of you any reward for it (my mission) but love for my near relatives”
, Imam asked.
“Yes, I have”
, said he.
‘Ali Ibn Husayn added,“Those near relatives are we, man”
. Imam asked again.“How about the verse in Bani-Isra’il Sura “Give the rights of the relatives?”
“Yes”
, he answered.
“We are those relatives”
, stated Imam.“Have you ever read the verse of ‘And know that whatever thing you gain, a fifth of it is for Allah and for the Apostle and for the near of the kin’ “, asked ‘Ali Ibn Husayn.
The man answered, “Yes”
.
“How about this verse, man? Allah only desires to keep away the uncleanness from you, O people of the House! And to purify you a (thorough) purifying”
, asked Imam.
“Yes, I have read it”
, he said.
“These people of the house are we”
. ‘Ali Ibn Husayn added.
The man ashamed of whatever he had produced kept silent for a while. Then he rose his head up to the sky and said,“O My Allah! I repent of what I have said and of the grudge I have born them. I loathe the enemies of Muhammad and his progeny”
.
Imam Sadjdjad’s lamentation as well as his real worship within the frame of these prayers was an instructive lesson for the present corrupted community wherein Islam was disdained by the Umayya. His lamentation was also for the harrowing event of Karbala.
Imam had stated,“Although doubtful about his death, Jacob wept for Joseph so hard that his eyes turned blind. How can I not help weeping while sixteen people from the Prophet’s Household were martyred in front of my very eyes.”
His lamentation did automatically make people conscious of the event in Karbala though he himself recounted the details of the event, moreover.
Imam Sadjdjad and Slaves
One of Imam’s activities, both religious and political, was his heed to a class who had been under socially vehement pressure from the caliph II’s tenure onward particularly during the Umayyads’ term and had been the most underprivileged group in the Islamic community in early centuries. The bondsmen and bondswomen whether Iranian, Roman, Egyptian or Sudanese suffering the most laborious tasks were humiliated by their masters.
Like Amir al-Mu’minin (a), Imam Sadjdjad (a) absorbed a number of Iraqi Mawali (freed slaves) through his Islamic conduct and attempted to upgrade the social reputation of this class. Once Imam freed a bondswoman and married her, in order to censure her, ‘Abd al-Malik Ibn Marwan reproached him for this marriage, Imam refereed to the verse of,
لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ
“Allah’s Messenger is a good model for you.”
Concerning the Prophet’s approach about Safiyya. He also pointed out the marriage of the Prophet’s cousin with Zayd Ibn Haritha.
Accordingly, he breathed new life into Prophet’s dead tradition afresh.
Sayyid al-Ahl has written that although Imam never needed slaves, he purchased them regularly only for the purpose of their releasing. Reportedly, some one hundred thousand slaves were freed by Imam. Discerning Imam’s intention, the slaves exposed themselves to him to be purchased. Since Imam Sadjdjad had been purchasing them day in and day out, a large group was formed in Medina like an army including male and female slaves being all Imam’s Mawali.
Narrated by ‘Allama Amini, at the end of each fasting month of Ramadan, Imam Sadjdjad freed twenty slaves. He has added that never did he keep a slave more than a year and even after setting free he granted some properties to them.
During that period they personally got well acquainted with Imam Sadjdjad’s extensive knowledge, ethics and piety and their affection for him was as a consequence natural. Some time a bondwoman with a bowl of water was pouring water on Imam’s hands. All of a sudden it dropped down, knocked Imam on the face and injured him. As soon as Imam took a look at her, she said, والكاظمين الغيط“Those restraining their anger.”
Imam said,“I restrained my anger”
. والعافين عن الناس“Those forgiving people.”
,added she.“I forgave you”
, Imam stated. والله يحب المحسنين
“Allah loves the benevolent,”
she recited. Imam said,“For Allah’s sake, I released you”
.
On stepping out of the mosque, Imam Sadjdjad (a) was insulted by someone. When Imam’s Mawali invaded him, Imam hindered them and stated,“What has remained unrevealed about us is more than what he expresses”
. The man became ashamed after all and was pardoned by Imam generously.
Now once again Imam’s magnanimity is mentioned. It is worth recounting a story.
‘Abd Allah Ibn Muhammad Ibn ‘Umar had narrated, “Hisham Ibn Isma‘il, an Umayya governor in Medina had ignored the neighbors’ rights and had begun annoying us specifically ‘Ali Ibn Husayn. When he was deposed, Walid commanded to expose him to the public so that any one willing could take revenge on him. Hisham confessed that he scared no one that much but ‘Ali Ibn Husayn. While being hung from the Marwan bulwark, he requested his friends not to utter an insulting word when Imam Sadjdjad passed by. As soon as noticing Imam going, Hisham yelled out, الله اعلم حيث يجعل رسالته
“Allah truly knows with whom to lay His mission.”
The HAshimites after the Event of Karbala’
Aside from Imam Sadjdjad there existed two ‘Abbasids and ‘Alawites figures who cooperated in political and collective activities. One was Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya, ‘Ali’s son, and the other was ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib whose fame was thanks to the narrations quoted from the Prophet notably dealing with interpretation.
Not Fatima’s son however, he was deemed high-ranking by the Shi‘ite Muslims due to his elderliness among the other ‘Alawites as the leader of political Shi‘ite Muslims, propounding Ahl al-Bayt’s leadership politically. Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya had been eminent and focus of Imam ‘Ali’s attention in the course of wars at that Imam’s term. The flag of Imam’s army in the war of Djamal was held aloft by Ibn Hanafiyya.
His own analysis was that both Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn were Imam ‘Ali’s eyes and he was his hand and it was hand which ought to protect the eyes.
Indicating the positions of these three brothers, Imam ‘Ali had state, أين النجم من الشمس والقمر
“Where is the star of the sun and the moon.”
Imam enlightened them why the flag was given to Ibn Hanafiyya. It had been for the protection of the Prophet’s descendants.
That he had not been from the Fatimids was an excuse for Ibn Zubayr to humiliate him later
although never did it affect the Shi‘ite Muslims.
No one doubts that he had been one of the most steadfast Shi‘ite Muslims as his actions had verified the fact; nevertheless, no evidence could ever be located from the historical sources about his claim for leadership, though others might take advantage of him, even found a sect and believe his Mahdavitism. Many individuals including a few Shi‘ites Imams had had the same affliction too. Ibn Hanafiyya was the narrator of the hadiths which could lead people more towards the Holy Prophet’s Household.
He has been quoted as saying, من أحبنا لله نفعه الله بحبنا ولو كان اسيراً بالدّيلم
“Any one who loves us, he will be benefited by Allah even if he is imprisoned in Diylam.”
The devotees of the Household were many whereas the loyal to the verse of, قُلْ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تُحِبُّونَ اللَّهَ فَاتَّبِعُونِي“Say, If you love Allah, then follow me”
were few.
Owing to this fact Imam Sadjdjad had stated, ما بمكة والمدينة عشرون رجلا يحبنا
“Our Faithful Shi‘ite Muslims do not exceed twenty both in Mecca and Medina.”
The number of the political enthusiasts was great, however.
When addressing him, Ibn Hanafiyya’s followers usually said, يابن خيرالاخيار وابن ابرّ الابرار ما خلا النبيين والمرسلين
“O son of the best of the best, son of the benevolent of the benevolent after the prophets and the Apostles.”
More threatening of Ibn Zubayr’s two adversaries namely, Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya and Mukhtar was Ibn Hanafiyya. The whys and the wherefores were one, Mukhtar had risen up in Kufa under his banner and the other was that the leadership of some part f Shi‘ites movement apparently had been undertaken by him. Ibn Zubayr who had determinedly bent his efforts to smear their reputation banned reciting blessing to the Holy Prophet (s) for 40 weeks.
Being asked for its reason, he said, ان له أهيل سوء فان ذكر مدّوا أعناقهم لذكره
“His family is small. Whenever he is commemorated, all members of this family will say we are in this family.”
He had made more offensive remarks in this respect as well
like, بيت سوء لا أول لهم ولا أخر“The sinister house for which there is neither beginning nor end.”
It aroused Ibn ‘Abbas’s anger acutely banished by Ibn Zubayr to Ta’if.
Ibn Zubayr himself had made a confession that it had been 40 years he bore this family a grudge.
He was the one who incited his father to betray Ahl al-Bayt and stand against Imam ‘Ali (a) in Djamal.
Concerning him Imam ‘Ali had stated, ما زال الزبير منا اهل البيت حتي نشأ ابنه المشؤوم عبد الله
“Zubayr always belonged to us, Ahl al-Bayt until his inauspicious son, ‘Abd Allah, emerged.”
As narrated by Ibn Abi l-Hadid, the only stimulater of ‘Ayisha had also been ‘Abd Allah Ibn Zubayr according to Ibn ‘Umar.
It was not unreasonable why she felt affection for him after his father and the Prophet.
These was a testimony that how great was the grudge Ibn Zubayr bore the ‘Alawites, Although his archenemy was the Umayyads, neverever did he leave the Hashimites relieved. Since the Hashimites naturally swore no allegiance to him, he emancipated Ibn Hanafiyya, Ibn ‘Abbas together with 24 people from among the Hashimites in the entrance to the well of Zamzam. Mukhtar’s envoys succeeded to release them in an ambush attack with their bare hands.
Ibn Zubayr’s determination had been to burn them to death. When ‘Urwa Ibn Zubayr, famous for narrating the Prophet’s hadiths, was objected in this regard, he reacted as saying that it had been done for the purpose of maintaining Muslim solidarity and it had been what the caliph II had adopted against those who opposed to swearing allegiance to Abu Bakr. Even he had accumulated logs to set fire to their houses.
Nevertheless, Ibn Zubayr had not the audacity to do so in view of the fact that a majority of his followers had turned to him merely due to the Umayyads oppression and as a matter of fact they would rather be with a corrupt man than be with a more corrupt one and on no accounts would they allow him.
Time after time in his sermons, Ibn Zubayr cavilled Imam ‘Ali (a) and made Ibn Hanafiyya raise an objection. Consequently, verbal dispute flared up between them.
It resulted in Ibn Hanafiyya’s expulsion which was followed by Ibn ‘Abbas’s protest.
Seeking advantage by exploiting this dispute, ‘Abd al-Malik wrote to Ibn Hanafiyya inviting him to Damascus. Ibn ‘Abbas admiring Ibn Hanafiyya’s character requested ‘Abd al-Malik to make allowances for him. He accepted his demand, hence Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya betook himself to Damascus. Anyone who passed by him on the way talked about his uprising. His features had become proverbial. ‘Abd al-Malik who predicted his menace informed Ibn Hanafiyya while en route that he should swear allegiance to him if coming to Damascus. Declining his proposal, he switched his way to Mecca again and resided in Abu Talib mountain-pass with a group of his Kufiyan friends. The conflicts between him and Ibn Zubayr reignited and sparked off his expulsion to Ta’if. Meanwhile Ibn ‘Abbas was expelled from Mecca to Ta’if too; therefore, both began propagating against Ibn Zubayr together. It was where Ibn ‘Abbas passed away in 68 and Ibn Hanafiyya said prayer for him.
The final phases of Ibn Hanafiyya’s life remained vague. Some people known as followers of the Kissanids claimed that he had been alive and living on Radwa mount. In accordance with Ibn A‘tham, he left Ta’if with 40 Shi‘ite Muslims to Radwa mount and disappeared without trace.
His going to Radwa mount was mentioned by Ya‘qubi as well.
From Sayyid Himyari’s poems, once a believer of the Kissanids, a belief in Ibn Hanafiyya’s Mahdavitism and his disappearance from sight can be inferred.
Alluding to the Prophet’s hadith on Mahdavitism,“His name is like that of mine and his nickname also resembles that of mine”
, he had composed,
يفوز بكنيتي واسمي لاني نحلتمـاه والمهدي من بعدي
يغيّب عنهم حتى يقولوا تضمنه بطيبة بطـن لحــد
سنين وأشهر برضوى بشعب بيـن أنمـار وأسد
“He will be in a grace that I have bestowed him with my name and nickname. He will be the leader after me. He will disappear while people say he has gone to his last resting-place. For years and months he will be invisible in the valley among the lions and leopards and on Radwa mount.”
The lines below belong to Kuthayyir ‘Azza about Kissanids tenets,
ألا ان الائمة مـن قريش ولاة الحق أربعـة سـواء
علي والثلاثه مـن بنيـه هم الاسباط ليس بهم خفاء
فسبط، سبط ايمـان وبر وسبط غيّبتـه كربـلاء
وسبط لا يذوق الموت حتى يقود الخيل يقدمه اللـواء
تغيب لا يري فيهم زمانـا برضوي عنده عسل وماء
“Be informed that Imams from Quraysh and the owners of rights are four, ‘Ali and his three sons. These are his sons not anyone else. A son of his was the example of faith and goodness while his another son was removed in Karbala. The other one who has not yet tasted death in order to lead cavalrymen having a standard at the front is disappeared from view on Radwa mount with honey and water.”
Some considered Mukhtar as the founder of the Kissanids which might have been named after one of Imam ‘Ali’s slaves called Kissanids.
Other reasons have been presented for its denomination in various books related to different sects and religions. No scientific research has ever been done yet, but some are of this belief that the Kissanids have been wholly fabricated by narrators.
As a number believed that Ibn Hanafiyya had shared in foundation of such a sect, the ‘Abbasids tried from the outset to secure power through ‘Ali’s succession, thus they declared a proportion for Ibn Hanafiyya. In order to justify their caliphate, they announced that the Prophet’s authority transferred to ‘Ali then to Imam Hasan and Husayn and entrusted to Ibn Hanafiyya by Imam Husayn (a). After being transferred to Ibn Hanafiyya’s son, Abu Hashim, it was devolved to Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas subsequent to Abu Hashim’s death.
Connecting these two issues reveals that the Kissanids sect had been beneficial to the ‘Abbasids so that it could transfer the caliphate this way to their lineage. Later on, that way went disadvantageous to the ‘Abbasids. Accordingly, they decided to legitimize their caliphate with recourse to ‘Abbas and proving his inheritance from the Prophet.
‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas, another distinguished member of the Hashimites, was among Ibn Zubayr’s unyielding opponents in Mecca. Yazid, when alive, had held him in high esteem for his opposition against Ibn Zubayr owing to the fact that he had imagined he could use this opportunity in favor of himself.
In response to his letter, touching upon Imam Husayn’s and ‘Abd al-Muttalib’s offspring’s murders, Ibn ‘Abbas reproved him as saying, لا أباًلك ! أنسيت قتلك الحسين وفتيان عبدالمطلب، مصابيح الدجي الذين غادرهم جنودك مصرعين في صعيد واحد مرملين بالدماء مسلوبين بالعراء غيرمكفنين …“O fatherless! Have I forgotten Husyan’s murder and ‘Abd al-Muttalib’s youths who were lights in darkness, those whom your troops left while shrouded in their blood and stripped off they had been fallen on the ground?”
And about his father he added, وقد أمات ابوك السنّة جهلاً وأحيا البدع والاحداث المضلّة عمداً
“Your father did ignorantly dissolve the Prophet’s Sunna and did expressly revive the misleading heresies.”
Yazid in his answer accused Ibn ‘Abbas of being an accomplice of ‘Uthman’s assassins. In return, Ibn ‘Abbas said that the main culprit had been his father, Mu‘awiya, because he had delayed his assistance until ‘Uthman was dead.
Like Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya
, in Ibn ‘Abbas’s opinion caliphate had been changed terribly from Prophethood and caliphate into monarchism. He advised people to keep as far away from both Ibn Zubayr and the Umayyads as possible, for they both drive them toward Hell.
Quite compatible was the position adopted by Ibn ‘Abbas about the events in Mecca during Ibn Zubayr’s time with that of Muhammad Ibn Hanafiyya. Ibn ‘Abbas mainly backed Ibn Hanafiyya and every now and then they both got into argument with Ibn Zubayr over diverse issues.
One of their most considerable arguments was when Ibn Zubayr set Ibn ‘Abbas against the people abiding by caliph II in the issue of“temporary marriage ban”
by accusing him on the pulpit of believing in“temporary marriage”
. Ibn ‘Abbas stood up all at once and declared that his belief in temporary marriage was based on what the Holy Prophet had prescribed and if he (Ibn Zubayr) had doubted, he could have asked his mother.
Ibn ‘Abbas’s oposition culminated in his expulsion from Mecca. Banished to Ta’if, under no circumstances did he relinquish his struggle.
About Ibn Zubayr he told people, بقي أقوام يطلبون الدنيا بعمل الاخرة ويلبسون جلود الضأن تحتها قلوب الذئاب … ليظن الناس أنهم من الزاهدين“Those who are remained are seeking worldly life and are wolves in sheep’s clothing to pretend they are ascetic people.”
It caused Ibn Zubayr to write to him taking him to task. Notwithstanding, Ibn ‘Abbas, an eminent figure, never abstained from answering him reproachfully.
Ibn Hanafiyya said prayer for ‘Abd Allah Ibn ‘Abbas who passed away in 68 in Ta’if and announced, اليوم مات رباني هذه الامة رحمه الله تعالي“Today a divine person from among this nation died. May Allah bless him.”
Up to that time and even after a long while, there was no strife amongst the Hashimites. As observed afterwards, conflict between the ‘Abbasids and the Talibites triggered off and developed so gradually that the Talibites were deemed the ‘Abbasids’ archenemies at Mansur’s time and were under their heaviest pressure.
Whatsoever had been narrated regarding the Hashimites after ‘Abd al-Malik’s sovereignty shows that he had adopted the policy of condescension and had written to Hadjdjadj to avoid streaming the blood of ‘Abd al-Muttalib’s descendants. Since Abu Sufyan’s family had lost their power this way.
In the meantime, until Zayd Ibn ‘Ali’s uprising in 122 there had been no openly political activity on the part of the Hashimites except what had been said vaguely about the ‘Abbassid’s.
0%
Author: Rasul Ja'farian
