|
It was this campaign of persecution that forced the Imamite missionary
Hisham b. al-Hakam to hide in Mada`in, from whence he
escaped to Kufa, where he died two months later(1).
However al-Rashid's arrests did not deter the Imamite underground
activities, especially in Basra. Therefore, according to
the Imamite narrations, al-Kazim was poisoned for
al-Rashid in 183/799 at the instigation of Yahya
al-Barinaki(2).
Al-Rashid also put to death sixty `Alids who were in his prisons(3).
The death of al-Kazim led to another schism amongst the Imamites. The
first group, which represented quite a large body, was
called the Waqifa. They held that he was al-Qa’im
al-Mahdi, but they differed amongst themselves
concerning his death and split into four sub-groups,
three of whom maintained that he had died while the
fourth denied it(4).
A few anecdotes mentioned by the Ithna' `Ashariyya suggest that the cause
of the denial of al-Kazim's death was that some of his
agents, like `Uthman b. `Isa al-Rawasi in Egypt, and
Ziyad, al-Qindi, `Ali b. Abi Hamza, Hayyan and al-Sarraj
in Kufa, possessed a large amount of money (more than a
hundred thousand dinars) which belonged to al-Kazim.
Since they had used this money for their own benefit,
they denied his death and rejected the Imamate of
al-Riďa in order that they would have an excuse for not
returning the money(5).
However, it is hard to agree with alKashshi's view concerning the reason
behind the emergence of the Waqifa sect. Most of the
traditions concernng the occultation and the rise of
al-Qa’im are attributed to al-Sadiq, who did not
indicate explicitly which of his descendants would be
al-Qa’im(6).
Therefore it is very likely that a considerable number of the muhaddithun
thought that the Imam had indicated his son Musa and
hence stopped at him, contending that he was al-Qa’im
al-Mahdi and was in a state of occultation.
The second group resulting from the schism after al-Kazim's death held
that he had passed away and the Imam was his son `Ali
al-Riďa, who, according to al-Kulayni, assumed the
Imamate by the designation of his father(7).
Al-Riďa faced many difficulties in proving his right to
the Imamate, not only to his father's prominent
followers, but also to his brother Ahmad.(8)
However, between the years 183-199/799-814, he managed
to maintain a considerable number of followers, and
administer an underground system of communication to
carry on the religious functions of his Imamate(9).
Moreover his preference for the religious dimensions of Islam, rather
than its political dimensions, made him a magnet for
many individuals, including the precursors of the sufi
movements, especially in Khurasan(10).
But many Imamites who had accepted his Imamate were not
satisfied with his quietist attitude and involved
themselves in the underground activities of the
revolutionary Zaydites, probably without his permission(11).
3. The Attitude of al-Riďa towards the `Alid Revolt against al-Ma’mun
When al-Amin became caliph, Iraq was the centre of his power. It was here
that he maintained the support of the Arabs, and
especially that of the Murji'ite scholars (al-amma,
later called the Sunnites), while his brother al-Ma’mun
was governor of Khurasan and gained the support of its
military leaders and senior administrators, especially
the Persian vizier al-Fadl b. Sahl and his partisans,
who eventually helped him to overthrow al-Amin(12).
Al-Ma’mun's success in gaining the caliphate was contrary to the
political and economic interest of al-Amm's supporters.
Therefore many regional revolts took place in Syria,
al-Jazira, Yemen and Iraq, headed by the local `Abbasid
governors(13).
At the same time the `Alids used their underground propaganda which was
influential in the Yemen, Hijaz and Iraq, to exploit
al-Ma’mun's difficulties in Iraq and to cause a revolt
in Kufa in 199/815. Thus these regions fell out of
al-Ma’mun's control.
Although reports about the ideological identity of the `Alid uprising and
the events surrounding it are confused, apparently it
was a Zaydite revolt(14)
maintained with the support of some Imamite sects. These
included the followers of Ahmad b. Musa al-Kazim and the
sabtiyya, the followers of Muhammad b. Ja’far al-Sadiq(15),
along with some of the Imamites, but without the direct
order of the eighth Imam, al-Riďa(16).
The spiritual leader of this revolt was Muhammad b. Ibrahim b. Tabataba,
while its military leader was Abu al-Saraya. It broke
out under the slogan "We invite people to rally around
the most suitable leader from the progeny of Muhammad
and to practice the teachings of the Qur'an and the
sunna'(17)
in Kufa on the 10th Jumada 199/26th January 815, where
the rebels had the support of the people of the environs
of Kufa and of the bedouins. Abu al-Saraya minted coins
in his own name in Kufa, managed to defeat three
`Abbasid armies and occupied Mada'in(18).
Moreover he dispatched many successful campaigns under the leadership of
al-Riďa's brothers and relatives to extend his authority
in Iraq, al-Ahwaz, Fars, the Hijaz, and Yemen. They
fulfilled their tasks and became the governors of these
regions. For example, Zayd b. Musa al-Kazim became the
governor of alAhwaz and Basra, Fars came under the
control of Isma'il b. Musa al-Kazim, and Yemen came
under the control of his brother Ibrahim, Wasit was
ruled by Husayn b. Ibrahim b. al-Hasan b `Ali. Abu
al-Saraya appointed Sulayman b. Dawud in Medina, and
nominated al-Husayn al-Aftas as governor in Mecca,
authorising him to be the leader of the pilgrims and to
provide the Ka'ba with a white kiswa(19).
The authority of Abu al-Saraya increased after the mysterious death of
the spiritual leader of the revolt, Ibn Tabataba on the
1st Rajab 199/15th February 815, and the refusal of the
eminent `Alid, `Ali b. 'Ubayd Allah, to accept the
position of Ibn Tabataba. Abu al-Saraya, in order to
evade the interference of any strong spiritual leader,
nominated for this post a young `Alid called Muhammad b.
Muhammad b. Zayd b. `Ali(20),
and monopolised all affairs of the leadership of the
revolt.
Abu al-Saraya's full control in Iraq did not continue, because the
`Abbasid army defeated him at Qasr b. Hubayra near Kufa
and forced him to withdraw towards Basra along with 800
horsemen. But news came to him that his governor in
Basra, Zayd b. Musa al-Kazim, had also been defeated
after hard combat and had been captured by the `Abbasid
troops. Thus he went towards al-Ahwaz, but was defeated
by the `Abbasid governor of that city and his followers
dispersed. A few months later the troops of al-Hasan b.
Sahl captured him at Jalawla' and on 10th Rabic I
200/18th October 815 they beheaded him, after which his
body was impaled in Baghdad(21).
It is worth mentioning that the failure of this revolt caused some
Imamites to hold that Musa al-Kazim, the seventh Imam,
was al-Qa’im al-Mahdi They had considered his son Ahmad'
as the lawful successor of his father. But since he had
participated with Abu al-Saraya, they rejected his
Imamate and denied the death of al-Kazim(22).
This fact reveals the general attitude of the Imamites towards any
militant action and indicates that they had Hadiths
concerning the rise of an Imam with the sword, whose
uprising would never be defeated, for he could not die
without establishing the government of the People of the
House(23).
This may be the reason behind the quiescent attitude of those followers
of al-Riďa who did not take any open or active part in
the revolt of Abu al-Saraya.
On hearing of the military defeat of their comrades on the Iraqi front
after the death of Abu al-Saraya, the rebels in Mecca,
who had full control of the Hijaz and the Yemen, made
overtures to Muhammad b. Ja`far al-Sadiq, asking him to
be their leader and finally persuading him to accept
their offer. They swore the oath of allegiance to him as
their caliph and called him Amir al-Mu'minin on 6th
Rabi` II 200/13th November 815(24).
He himself claimed that he was al-Qa’im al-Mahdi, and based his claim on
prophetic traditions(25).
But the eighth Imam al-Riďa denied his claim, although
he endeavoured to save him from a military defeat by
advising trim to postpone his revolt against the
`Abbasids(26).
The installation by the rebels of an `Alid caliph in Mecca with the
epithet al-Mahdi threatened the authority of al-Ma’mun.
Having failed to subdue the revolt by force, al-Ma’mun
decided to resort to political methods, by conciliating
the eight Imam al-Riďa. He dispatched an army under the
leadership of 'Isa b. al-Juludi to Medina for this
purpose(27).
But this army was badly defeated at the hands of Muhammad b. Ja’far
al-Sadiq. Therefore al-Juludi asked al-Riďa to contact
Muhammad and ask him to end his resistance, but he
rejected al-Riďa's mediation and insisted on continuing
his rebellion. This led to skirmishes between the
`Abbasid troops and the rebels until the end of the year
200/815, when the `Abbasid army captured Muhammad b.
Ja’far al-Sadiq and forced him to renounce his claim
publicly(28).
(1) According to al-Najashi and
al-Tusi, Hisham's death occurred in 199/814. But
it seems that he died before that. Al-Kashshi
associates his death with the arrest of al-Kazim
in 179/795. In that year Hisham attended a
theological symposium in the presence of
al-Rashid and Yahya al-Barinak'. Later al-Rasfd
issued an order to arrest al-Kazim and his
partisans. Hence Hisham escaped to Madain, then
to Kufa where he died two months later;
al-Najashi, 338; T. al-Fihrist, 355; Ikhtiyar,
255-6,258-62.
(2) N. Firaq, 67; Ikhtiyar, 258;
al-Kafi, I, 258-9; al-Ya`qubi relates that the
`Alid underground activities were probably quite
strong in Basra. The increase in the activities
of the missionary of this group, Ahmad b. ‘Isa
al-`Alawi, who spent sixty years hidden there,
finally caused al-Rashid to pursue them. Ahmad
b. `Isa was imprisoned, but he managed to escape
to Basra in 188/803. Then `Abbasid spies
detected the missionary and the agent of his
group, Hadir, who refused to reveal the place of
his leader; so they killed him and impaled his
body in Baghdad; al-Ya`qubi,III,160.
(3) Uyun, I,89-90, II, 143.
(4) N. Firaq, 67-8, 70; Q. Maqalat,
89-91; al-Najashi, 61, 258, 230-31. It seems
from the report of al-Kashshi that Muhammad b.
Bashir and his followers applied the term
al-Mahdi to al-Kazim, whose death they denied,
giving him the epithet al-Qaim al-Mahdi
(Ikhtiyar, 478). Such evidence indicates that
the Imamites already knew about the rise of one
of their Imams under the title of al-Qaim al
Mahdi, but they were not sure who this would be.
(5) al-Saduq,`Ilal al-Shara'i'
(Najaf, 1966), I, 235;`Uyun, 91-2;
Ikhtiyar,459-60,467,468,493. The leaders of the
Waqifa were Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. Shammun and
'Ali b. Abi Hamza; Ikhtiyar,444;
al-Najashi,230-1.
(7)al-Kafi, I, 312; Q.
Maqalat, 89
(10)Most of the eastern Sufi
movements trace their origins to Ma'ruf al-Karkhi
(d. 200/815), who was a companion of al-Riďa.
They regarded al-Riďa as of the Sufi movement,
but at the same time they did not believe in his
Imamate. For an account of this relation see al-Shibi,
op. cit.
(12)Watt, Formative Period,
176; al-Fakhri, 159-61; al-Kamil„ VI, 227.
(13)Ibn A`tham al-Kufi, op.
cit., VIII, 312-3. The most dangerous revolt was
the rebellion of Nasr b. Shabth in al-Jazira.
Another serious revolt was the protest of the
populace (al-Amma) of Baghdad against the
installation of al-Riďa as heir-apparent by al-Ma’mun.
Thus they installed Ibrahim b. al-Mahdi as a
caliph there; Bidaya, X, 280-2; al-Kamil, VI,
230.
(14)It is clear from the
reports of al-Tabari and al-Najashi that the
rebels did not believe in the Imamate of a
specific `Alid Imam, but they supported the
Imamate of him who would rise in arms in order
to establish his rights to this office (Tabari,
III, 979, 1019; al-Najashi, 194). They wrote on
the coins which they mined in Kufa a Qur'anic
verse (al-Saff LI, 4) revealing their,
revolutionary inclination. Al-Isfahani and
al-Sahib b. `Abbad considered it a Zaydite
uprising; Maqatil, 347, 350;`Uyun, II, 235; Ibn
`Abbad, op. cit., 222.
(16)A considerable body of the
followers of al-Riďa participated in this revolt
without his instruction. Perhaps they noticed
that the brothers of their Imam were prominent
leaders of the revolt, and thought that al-Riďa
was behindtheir participation. Hence they joined
it. There were men like Muhammad b. Muslima al-Kufi
(Tabari, III, 989), who was regarded by al-Najashi
as trustworthy (al-Najashi, 286;`Uyun, II,
234-5). It seems from al-Riďa's interpretation
of a dream of one of his partisans concerning an
expected uprising that he already knew of the
activities of his kinsmen; al-Kafi, VIII, 257.
(17)al-Da`wa li-l-Riďa min Al
Muhammad wa-`Amal bi-l-Kitab wa-l-sunna.
(19)al-Kamil, VI, 214-16;
Maqatil, 355; Tabari, III, 981-3, 988. Al-Azraqi
reports that Abu al-Saraya sent a kiswa of silk
to the Ka`ba in two colours, white and yellow,
the former of which was the colour of the`Alids'
standard. Between the two parts was written: "In
the name of God, the Merciful, the
Compassionate. May God bless Muhammad and his
progeny, the noble descendants, the pure, and
the best of the human race. Abu al-Saraya, he
who invites people to rally behind Al Muhammad
has ordered that this kiswa be made for the holy
House of God." al-Azraqi, Akhbar Makka (Mecca,
1965), I, 263, 264.
(20)al-Najashi, 194; Maqatil,
354; Gibb, H. A. R., "Abu al-Saraya", E.I2
(21)Maqatil,363-6;Tabari,
III,985-6.
(22)Al-Kulayni reports several
traditions on the authority of `Ali b. al-Husayn
and al-Sadiq regarding this point, al-Kafi,
VIII, 264, 310.
(25)Maqatil, 359; Uyun, 155.
(26)al-Kafi, I, 491; Maqatil,
360.
(27)al-Kafi, I, 488-9; `Uyun,
II, 146; Tabari, III, 1000.
(28)Maqatil, 360; al-Yafi`i,
al-`Iqd al-Thamm, I, 444-5.
|
