Edmund Hayes "The Envoys of the Hidden Imam"

[Jaane Rabb]

Salaam,

Has anyone read the Ph.D dissertation by Edmund Hayes titled "The Envoys of the Hidden Imam: Religious Institutions and the Politics of the Twelver Occultation"? What is your opinion on the work?

I've got a hold of it recently and have just started reading it. For anyone who hasn't read it and is interested, firstly, here's the abstract:

Quote

In 260 AH/ 874 CE, the Eleventh Imam of the Imami Shiʿa died, precipitating a succession crisis that was ultimately solved by replacing this line of living, visible leaders with a messianic figure, hidden from humankind who will return at the end of time to rule in peace and justice. This dissertation seeks to answer why this the doctrine of the Occultation of the Twelfth Imam was successful, among all the possible solutions to the crisis in the Imamate that were proposed in the first few years after the death of the Eleventh Imam. I show how the financial-sacral institutions that had increasingly surrounded the Imams and mediated their presence to the community in the pre-Occultation era came to replace the authority of the Imam after 260/874.

I analyze the textual sources for the earliest phase of development of Twelver Occultation ideas against the backdrop of the contestation of authority between members of the family of the Imam (especially the mother and brother of the Eleventh Imam) as well as the household retainers of the Imam, and the agents (wakīls) of the financial-sacral system. These contestations clustered around a number of key events, the meaning of which were shifted and erased according to the requirements of later doctrine, but which still leave residual traces throughout our sources. Of particular importance was the succession dispute over the inheritance the Eleventh Imam, claims to which were associated with the spiritual legacy of the Imamate. The success of the Imam’s dissolute brother, Jaʿfar ‘the Liar’, in winning the inheritance dispute led to a split in the Imami elite between those who followed Jaʿfar, and the financial agents who opposed Jaʿfar and claimed to preserve the legacy of the old Imam on behalf of the hidden Twelfth Imam, in particular the obscure agent Ḥājiz b. Yazīd. A further crisis ensued after the deaths of the old guard. However, quasi-Imamic authority was gradually arrogated to a single pre-eminent representative of the class of financial-sacral agents of the Imam: the so-called ‘Envoy’ (Ar. safīr), Abū Jaʿfar al-ʿAmrī (d. 305/917). His authority was contested both by members of the old guard of fiscal agents, and also by charismatic bābs associated with the gnostic tradition.

The authority of Abū Jaʿfar was institutionalized when his death gave rise to a succession process, through which Ibn Rawḥ al-Nawbakhtī laid claim to his legacy as the Envoy after him. Ibn Rawḥ’s authority as Envoy was challenged by a number of difficulties including difficulty in collecting the canonical taxes, and the claims to spiritual authority of various gnostic bābs whose radical claims upset various members of the Imami elite. Ultimately, such difficulties prevented the stable institutionalization of the office of Envoy, and soon after Ibn Rawḥ’s tenure of office, the Imami elite declared the end of the institution of Envoy, asserting that anyone who claimed to be the direct representative for the Imam was an imposter. However, though leadership of the Imami community then passed to the more diffuse epistemic authority of the scholars, the legacy of the Envoys became an important theological support, and founding myth for the Twelver Shiʿi community. Meanwhile, the messy conflicts of the early Occultation period came to be largely erased by the canonical doctrine of the “Four Praised Envoys” of the Hidden Imam.

Secondly, here's a download link to the full dissertation: http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=02225929387109073692

Fi Amanillah

PS. Please let me know if there's a better place to upload.

Edited October 4, 2016 by Jaane Ya Ali
URL changed

[Ibn al-Hussain]

I have read around 200 pages of it. It is like many other Western academic pieces on Shi'i history. There is no doubt that their (Western academia) research skills are to be applauded (of course thanks to the immense amount of funding and support they get from their educational institutions). There is a lot of good information/raw-data you can take from these articles/books, but I would be very cautious of the conclusions or analysis they make. There is a lot of room for critique, and the fact that much of Western academia in this area is based on a reductionist epistemology, it can often lead to fallacious and incorrect results. This article was also no exception (up until the 200 pages I read in February of this year).

Wassalam

[Jaane Rabb]

On 10/4/2016 at 7:41 PM, Ibn al-Hussain said:

I have read around 200 pages of it. It is like many other Western academic pieces on Shi'i history. There is no doubt that their (Western academia) research skills are to be applauded (of course thanks to the immense amount of funding and support they get from their educational institutions). There is a lot of good information/raw-data you can take from these articles/books, but I would be very cautious of the conclusions or analysis they make. There is a lot of room for critique, and the fact that much of Western academia in this area is based on a reductionist epistemology, it can often lead to fallacious and incorrect results. This article was also no exception (up until the 200 pages I read in February of this year).

Wassalam

Thanks.

Out of interest, are you aware of any books written about the Shia narrative by a non-Shia? I have taken an interest in reading works about our madhab written by non-Shia. All this time I've only heard and read details from within our books from our authors. I feel like I should read works about our madhab from other sources for the sake of fair studies and research, as our works will have a level of bias and won't necessarily highlight the issues in our literature/narrative. But then, one could argue that the outsider may take everything from within our books as sahih.

For example, I've already read the "The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shiism: A Sociohistorical Perspective" published by the Cambridge University Press. There were some alarming details presenting in this work, such as early Imamis believing in 13 Imams and not 12; That the majority of Imam Sadiq's followers took Ismail as the next Imam; That Ali ibn Kazim [as] got the title of al-Ridha from al-Mamun, the Abbasid caliph; That Imam Hadi [as] had appointed a successor who supposedly died before Imam Hadi [as] did; That Imam Jawad [as] had re-established the collection of Khums, which was supposedly waived for Shia only; That Imam Hadi [as] had one of his wakils assassinated due to keeping the khums for himself; etc.

These are all points made supposedly from hadith present in our literature.

Fi Amanillah

[Haydar Husayn]

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

Thanks.

Out of interest, are you aware of any books written about the Shia narrative by a non-Shia?

In terms of books, and therefore not mentioning articles:

Twelver Shi'ism by Andrew J Newman was pretty good, as are most of his books.

The Charismatic Community by Maria Massi Dakake has some interesting points.

Personally, I wouldn't limit myself to non-Shia works, and would also read the academic works of Shias within academia such as Hossein Modarressi, Najam Haider or Liyakat Takim (although that's not to say that they may not write things that go against orthodoxy in some instances, or provide information that some people might find surprising). As long as the works are written in an academic manner, with proper referencing and argumentation, then I don't mind whether they are written by Shias or non-Shias. For example I think 'The Origins and Early Development of Shi'a Islam' by S.H.M. Jafri is a good book, and I wouldn't dismiss it as flawed because it is written by a believer. Taking non-believers to be more 'neutral' or 'objective' is a dangerous road to go down, and the presuppositions of any author should always be examined carefully.

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

I have taken an interest in reading works about our madhab written by non-Shia. All this time I've only heard and read details from within our books from our authors. I feel like I should read works about our madhab from other sources for the sake of fair studies and research, as our works will have a level of bias and won't necessarily highlight the issues in our literature/narrative. But then, one could argue that the outsider may take everything from within our books as sahih.

You need to be careful in reading the works of non-Shias, not just because they will take everything as Sahih (as long as it fits their narrative), but also because you don't get very far in academia by publishing things that support the orthodox position of religious believers. What gets you places are 'new perspectives', even if they are subsequently shown to be baseless. Also, it's always possible to take a series of fairly innocent facts, weave them into a sinister narrative, and make it all seem very suspicious. If you are relying on the author to provide you with the source material, and are seeing it through their lens, then this can obviously be  problem.

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

For example, I've already read the "The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shiism: A Sociohistorical Perspective" published by the Cambridge University Press. There were some alarming details presenting in this work, such as

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

early Imamis believing in 13 Imams and not 12;

Was this based on more than the evidence of the book of Sulaym ibn Qays, which is very likely a forgery (even if a very early one)?

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

That the majority of Imam Sadiq's followers took Ismail as the next Imam; 

They assumed he would be the next Imam, since he was eldest, but this is well-known. One the specific point about 'majorities', and not directed at you in particular, I'm never too sure why Shias get surprised when a majority of the companions of an Imam go wrong, but are perfectly willing to accept an overwhelming majority of the companions of the Prophet (s) going wrong. It seems a bit strange to me.

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

That Ali ibn Kazim [as] got the title of al-Ridha from al-Mamun, the Abbasid caliph; 

Yes, this is well-known also. I think it's only really Shias (or most at least) that don't agree with this. I don't see why it should be a problem though. The status of an Imam isn't dependent on who first gave him a particular title.

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

That Imam Hadi [as] had appointed a successor who supposedly died before Imam Hadi [as] did;

I remember reading this, but I don't remember the details, so I'll leave it to others to respond to.

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

That Imam Jawad [as] had re-established the collection of Khums, which was supposedly waived for Shia only;

Who waved khums in the first place? An Imam, right? So why couldn't an Imam reinstate it. Whether it was khums, or being called something else, at least the 7th and 8th Imams were collecting money from their followers. This was one of the major issues of dispute after the death of Imam al-Kadhim (a).

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

That Imam Hadi [as] had one of his wakils assassinated due to keeping the khums for himself; etc.

There are reports of the Prophet (s) having a woman assassinated for reciting poetry against him. If you accept the status of the Prophet or the Imam, then it's their prerogative to call for the killing of someone they view as an enemy of Islam. I'm not saying either report is definitely correct, but it wouldn't really bother me if it were true.

 

5 minutes ago, Jaane Ya Ali said:

These are all points made supposedly from hadith present in our literature.

Fi Amanillah

There is lots of stuff in our hadith literature, and you can weave all kinds of stories by picking bit and pieces out. But I agree that it is a little disconcerting when you first come across this kind of stuff. Unfortunately, the history of religion is messy, with many crisis points, and events shrouded in mystery.

[Haji 2003]

I've started going through the dissertation and found this, on page 2, to be eye-brow raising:

Quote

Verena Klemm, was the first to clearly challenge the traditional narrative of the Four Envoys in an article published in 1984.