3 replies to this topic

[`Ali al-Nasir]

1. Is the mal`un Khattabiyya sect somewhat of a proto-Isma`ili sect? If so, did and do the Isma`ilis recognize Abu`l-Khattab (لعنت اللہ) as their founder or has he now become forgotten in their books? Do/did they accept some Khattabiyya doctrines like that of Abu`l-Khattab (لعنت اللہ) being the “silent prophet” while Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq was the “speaking prophet” (أعوذ بالله)?

2. In his Da`im al-Islam, why did Qadi Nu`man only include ahadith from the A`imma that we accept (i.e. the ones from Imam `Ali to Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq )? Even if he did not have the ability to compile ahadith from their earlier false imams, why did he not write down the edicts of the four "imams" he served under? Does this give credence to the theory that he was actually an Imami Shi`i under taqiyya? Also, why did he remove the sanad from the ahadith he copied down in his books? Where did the ahadith he copied down come from (as in the name of a text—I guess he probably took it from Zaydi sources)?

3. How did the mal`un Waqifiyya sect die out? How long did they exist for past the wafat of Imam Musa al-Kadhim ? Did the Waqifis cause trouble for any of our A`imma after Imam `Ali ar-Ridha ?

في امان الله

Edited by `Ali al-Nasir, 28 July 2012 - 05:34 PM.

[macisaac]

`Ali al-Nasir, on 28 July 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

1. Is the mal`un Khattabiyya sect somewhat of a proto-Isma`ili sect? If so, did and do the Isma`ilis recognize Abu`l-Khattab (لعنت اللہ) as their founder or has he now become forgotten in their books? Do/did they accept some Khattabiyya doctrines like that of Abu`l-Khattab (لعنت اللہ) being the “silent prophet” while Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq was the “speaking prophet” (أعوذ بالله)?

From what I recall, Abu 'l-Khattab apparently upheld the Imamate of Isma`il b. Ja`far, so in that sense they could be regarded as proto-Isma`ili.  I think however later Isma`ilis distanced themselves from him.

Quote

2. In his Da`im al-Islam, why did Qadi Nu`man only include ahadith from the A`imma that we accept (i.e. the ones from Imam `Ali to Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq )? Even if he did not have the ability to compile ahadith from their earlier false imams, why did he not write down the edicts of the four "imams" he served under? Does this give credence to the theory that he was actually an Imami Shi`i under taqiyya? Also, why did he remove the sanad from the ahadith he copied down in his books? Where did the ahadith he copied down come from (as in the name of a text—I guess he probably took it from Zaydi sources)?

It's an interesting point, but in going by Qadi Nu`man's other works he seems typically Fatimid Isma`ili, so I don't think the idea of him being an Imami under taqiyya can really hold much weight (as well as a number of the legal positions in Da`a'im itself running counter to our own, e.g. mut`a being haram).  One reason he might have only included such hadiths is that those were the only one's available to him, while those they believed in after as-Sadiq did not have anything to be ascribed to them.  Keep in mind how early "Isma`ili" theories of Imamate were quite in chaos, undergoing many revisions over time to account for whoever they currently believed in.  As to the source for Da`a'im, Wilferd Madelung has written an excellent paper on this, using the surviving extract of his larger fiqh hadith work, al-Idah, where he does cite his sources.  They are all largely Imami and Zaydi texts:

http://www.iis.ac.uk...AC_26-01-12.pdf

Quote

3. How did the mal`un Waqifiyya sect die out? How long did they exist for past the wafat of Imam Musa al-Kadhim ? Did the Waqifis cause trouble for any of our A`imma after Imam `Ali ar-Ridha ?

I get the impression they didn't last much longer after their founders died out (e.g. `Ali b. Abi Hamza) and perhaps a generation or two more.  A number of people who initially supported them early on eventually left the sect and upheld the Imamate of ar-Rida instead.  You don't hear much about them in the time of the later Imams if at all, and I don't think they still existed by the time scholars such as Shaykh al-Mufid were alive.

[`Ali al-Nasir]

جزاك الله خير brother for spreading your knowledge!

macisaac, on 28 July 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

From what I recall, Abu 'l-Khattab apparently upheld the Imamate of Isma`il b. Ja`far, so in that sense they could be regarded as proto-Isma`ili.  I think however later Isma`ilis distanced themselves from him.

Don't Isma`ilis sense something's amiss that the best companions of Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq , like Zurara b. A`yun, Muhammad b. Muslim, Hisham b. Hakim, `Abdullah b. Sinan, and Hisham b. Salim (well Zurara might be iffy but he definitely was not a believer in Isma`il b. Ja`far's imamate), followed Imam Musa al-Kadhim , while a mal`un person like Abu`l-Khattab supported Isma`il's imamate?

macisaac, on 28 July 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

It's an interesting point, but in going by Qadi Nu`man's other works he seems typically Fatimid Isma`ili, so I don't think the idea of him being an Imami under taqiyya can really hold much weight (as well as a number of the legal positions in Da`a'im itself running counter to our own, e.g. mut`a being haram).  One reason he might have only included such hadiths is that those were the only one's available to him, while those they believed in after as-Sadiq did not have anything to be ascribed to them.  Keep in mind how early "Isma`ili" theories of Imamate were quite in chaos, undergoing many revisions over time to account for whoever they currently believed in.  As to the source for Da`a'im, Wilferd Madelung has written an excellent paper on this, using the surviving extract of his larger fiqh hadith work, al-Idah, where he does cite his sources.  They are all largely Imami and Zaydi texts:

http://www.iis.ac.uk...AC_26-01-12.pdf

Do you have the full article for this?

Anyways, if I understand this correctly, you suggest that it was in-fighting amongst the Fatimid "imams" and the lack of a standardized religion amongst the Isma`ilis that led Qadi Nu`man to solely rely on traditions from our first six A`imma , right? And thus, he had to rely on Zaydi and Imami sources because of a lack of proper Isma`ili scholarship? Do you know why current Isma`ili's do not rely upon Qadi Nu`man's texts? Do they believe that their "imams" have the ability to abrogate the commands of Allah عز وجل, the Prophet , our A`imma , and their own prior imams?

macisaac, on 28 July 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

I get the impression they didn't last much longer after their founders died out (e.g. `Ali b. Abi Hamza) and perhaps a generation or two more.  A number of people who initially supported them early on eventually left the sect and upheld the Imamate of ar-Rida instead.  You don't hear much about them in the time of the later Imams if at all, and I don't think they still existed by the time scholars such as Shaykh al-Mufid were alive.

Thank you brother for this. Do you think they left their religion for ours because of a lack of leadership or was it because of our A`imma's harshness towards them (like calling them mamtura and cursing them)?

And I have another two questions: How did the Isma`ili sect survive? It seems they were about to become extinct like many of the false sects until `Ubaydullah al-Mahdi's uprising.
Can you tell me about the Fathiyya? I know little about them besides their major belief that the Imam after Imam Ja`far as-Sadiq was `Abdullah b. Ja`far.

في امان الله

Edited by `Ali al-Nasir, 29 July 2012 - 05:57 AM.

[`Ali al-Nasir]

Is there anyone who can answer my questions please?

I've looked more into the Waqifiyya and it seems that after the martyrdom of Imam `Ali ar-Ridha and the beginning of Imam Muhammad al-Jawad's imamate, some of those who were weak in iman became astray and reverted to the faith of the Waqifis due to their disbelief that a child of only 7 years could be the Imam.

في امان الله

Edited by `Ali al-Nasir, 03 August 2012 - 09:05 AM.