Investigating Badaa’: The appointment of Ismail and Muhammad
Note: Some websites disingenuously copy information / analysis listed without credit. Anything presented in my articles is fully original.
––
The stature of Musa ibn Ja’far al-Kadhim is so immense in Shi’i history, that the reader will not need a reminder of his significance or importance - to know who he is.
Initially quiescent in the wake of the passing of his father Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as), Musa al-Kadhim was catapulted to the reins of Imamate after his brothers Ismail and Abdullah were no longer in the picture.
Being the foremost claimant to Imamate as the eldest surviving son after Ismail and Abdullah, al-Kadhim’s hold onto power was accepted as a necessity - despite the fact there existed no objective criterion to ascertain his Imamate.
The Shi’a flocked to follow him, in fear of dying without knowing the Imam of their time - which would mean they would “die a death of Jahiliyya”, as our Imams described it.
Unsurprisingly, their conscious fear took the better of them - as they followed al-Kadhim, without taking into account the correct conditions that would ascertain the feasibility of his Imamate.
Evidence of al-Kadhim’s Imamate laid “secret” – unverifiable, all while the visible signs of Imamate pointed to only one contender among Imam al-Sadiq’s sons:
Ismail ibn Ja’far al-Sadiq (as).
A figure whom to the Khattabiya, elite of Imam al-Sadiq, was in ghayba – but to the commoners, was dead.
Being that I have discussed evidences for Ismail’s Imamate in public and private publications, I shall abstain from doing so in this article.
Instead, I will dedicate this post to discussing and contextualizing one single hadith which affirms Ismail’s appointment to the Imamate:
(Al-Tusi’s Ghayba, vol 1, p 224)
“It was narrated by Saad ibn Abdullah Al-Ash’ari, he said:
Abu Hashim Dawud ibn al-Qasim al-Ja’fari told me:
I was with Abu al-Hasan (al-Hadi), peace be upon him, at the time of the death of his son Abi Jaafar (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) - and he had made evident (that Muhammad will succeed him) and indicated him as his successor.
This made me think and say: This is the case of Abu Ibrahim and the case of Ismail.
Then Abu al-Hasan (al-Hadi), peace be upon him, came and said:
Yes, Abu Hashem, Allah did badaa’ to Abi Ja’far, and put in his place Abu Muhammad (al-Hasan al-Askari).
Just like Allah did badaa’ in Ismail after Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) after having indicated him (as successor) and appointed him.”
فقد رواه سعد بن عبد الله الأشعري قال: حدثني أبو هاشم داود بن القاسم الجعفري قال: كنت عند أبي الحسن عليه السلام وقت وفاة ابنهأبي جعفر - وقد كان أشار إليه ودل عليه - فإني لافكر في نفسي وأقول: هذه قضية أبي إبراهيم وقضية إسماعيل، فأقبل علي أبو الحسنعليه السلام فقال: نعم يا أبا هاشم بدا لله تعالى في أبي جعفر وصير مكانه أبا محمد، كما بدا لله في إسماعيل بعدما دل عليه أبو عبد اللهعليه السلام ونصبه
The first striking feature in this hadith that the reader will take note of is the following portion:
“Yes, Abu Hashem, Allah did badaa’ to Abi Ja’far, and put in his place Abu Muhammad (al-Hasan al-Askari).
Just like Allah did badaa’ in Ismail after Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) after having indicated him (as successor) and appointed him.”
Is it possible that this hadith indicates that Ismail was appointed to the Imamate, and that Imam al-Sadiq gave signs that he was appointed?
Was Abu Ja’far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) appointed to “Imamate” by his father Ali al-Hadi?
What is the definition of “badaa’” in this hadith?
The answer to these questions will be examined comprehensively, for it will reveal whether or not Ismail was appointed to Imamate - from the mouth of a Twelver Imam.
So let us begin!
Bismillah
––
1 ) An Abrogated Imamate?
The first question anyone would ask is:
How could Ali al-Hadi affirm the Imamate of Ismail ibn Ja’far? After all, there is no continuity between them.
Imamate is passed from father to son, after all. Not uncle to nephew.
In answering this question, we are led to the story of Shahawiyah ibn Abdullah al-Jallab - companion of Ali al-Hadi.
A firm Shi’i, Shahawiyah was a content man. He believed he knew who the Imam of his time was, and that his Imam had appointed his successor.
Knowing this, Shahawiyah believed he had ensured his salvation in his Dunya and Akhira for at least two generations.
After all, the law of Allah is personified in the figure of the Imam.
Moreover, it is the consensus of the Shi’a, and words of the Imam that Imamate cannot be removed from someone who was appointed to it.
Thus, Shahawiyah believed his faith was secure and he revelled in this fact.
Shaykh al-Mufid states (as quoted by al-Sharif al-Murtada):
(Al-Fusul al-Mukhtara, page 309)
“As for the matter of Imamate, Allah does not perform badaa’ regarding it.
And to that matter, the scholars of the Imamiyyah are in consensus and back themselves with the words of the Imams saying:
‘No matter what Allah performs badaa’ on, He does not perform badaa’ in removing a Prophet from his Prophethood, nor an Imam from his Imamate, nor a believer who has He took his covenant by faith for his faith”
ذلك إجماع فقهاء الإمامية، ومعهم فيه أثر عنهم عليهم السلام أنهم قالوا: " مهما بدا لله في شئ فلا يبدو له في نقل نبي عن نبوته ولا إمامعن إمامته ولا مؤمن قد أخذ عهده بالايمان عن إيمانه
Pursuant to his faith and knowing the appointed successor of an Imam cannot be changed –
Shahawiyah would narrate ahadith in which the Imam of his time indicated who his successor would be.
The only problem in this matter, is that the Imam of the time (Ali al-Hadi) had appointed his eldest son as his successor.
That son, Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi, had died prematurely - before his father’s death. Thus, he could not be the Imam.
This event set Shahawiyah into a state of panic and extreme shock, which he describes below:
(Ghayba of al-Tusi, vol 1, page 225)
“I used to narrate from Abu al-Hasan al-‘Askari (i.e, Imam al-Hadi) ahadith indicating Abi Ja’far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) is the next Imam.
When Abi Ja’far died, I panicked because of that. I remained perplexed - not moving forth nor back. I was scared to write to him (Imam al-Hadi) asking him about that, as I do not know how he will respond..”
كنت رويت عن أبي الحسن العسكري عليه السلام في أبي جعفر ابنه روايات تدل عليه، فلما مضى أبو جعفر قلقت لذلك، وبقيت متحيرا لاأتقدم ولا أتأخر، وخفت أن أكتب إليه في ذلك، فلا أدري ما يكون.
Somehow, the news of Shahawiyah’s anxiety about the Imam’s successor had reached Ali al-Hadi – despite Shahawiyah’s anxiety to write to him.
The overwhelming anxiety of course being that if Ali al-Hadi’s appointed successor had died prematurely –
Then it must necessarily mean that Ali al-Hadi himself is a false pretender - who does not have ‘ilm al-Ghayb (knowledge of the unseen).
This is because Imamate cannot be transferred, from someone who was already appointed.
How terrifying of an outcome is that?!
Ali al-Hadi recognized Shahawiyah’s fear, and instead gave an even more horrifying scenario to explain how the Imam-appointée could die:
(Al-Kafi)
12. Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Ishaq ibn Muhammad from Shahwayh ibn ‘Abdallah al-Jallab who has said the following. “Abu al-Hassan wrote to me in a letter as herein below. “You wanted to ask about the succeeding Imam after Abu Ja‘far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) and you were anxious about it. Do not feel sad; “God does not misguide a nation after having given them guidance until the means of piety are made known to them. . .” (9:115) Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, does not neglect the people whom He has granted guidance to go astray until He clarifies for them the means with which they can maintain piety. You master (Imam) after me will be, my son, Abu Muhammad (al-Hasan al-Askari)
as.svg
. With there is whatever you would need. Allah allows to precede whatever He wants and Allah allows to succeed whatever He wants. “For whatever sign We change or eliminate or cause to recede into oblivion, We bring forth a better sign, one that is identical.. .” (2:106). I have written enough convincing facts for the people of reason with awareness.”
علي بن محمد، عن إسحاق بن محمد، عن شاهويه بن عبد الله الجلاب قال: كتب إلي أبو الحسن في كتاب: أردت أن تسأل عن الخلفبعد أبي جعفر وقلقت (2) لذلك فلا تغتم فإن الله عز وجل " لا يضل قوما بعد إذ هداهم حتى يبين لهم ما يتقون " وصاحبك بعدي أبو محمدابني وعنده ما تحتاجون إليه، يقدم ما يشاء الله ويؤخر ما يشاء الله " ما ننسخ من آية أو ننسها نأت بخير منها أو مثلها " قد كتبتبما فيه بيان وقناع لذي عقل يقظان
The first clue to understanding Ali al-Hadi’s words here is the verse he cited:
“For whatever sign We change or eliminate or cause to recede into oblivion, We bring forth a better sign or one that is identical.. .” (2:106)
This is known as “the verse of abrogation”, it seeks to explain how God could issue a command (such as praying towards Jerusalem) and then “eliminate it or cause it to recede to oblivion”.
Then God will bring forth “bring forth a better sign or one that is identical”, which in case of prayer direction – is ordering Muslims to pray to Mecca, instead of Jerusalem.
How does this verse apply to Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi?
The secret lies in this phrase used by Ali al-Hadi:
“You wanted to ask about the succeeding Imam after Abu Ja‘far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi)”
The succeeding Imam of Abu Ja’far? What does this exactly mean?
The following hadith clarifies:
(Al-Kafi)
“9. Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from Ishaq ibn Muhammad from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Daryab who has said the following. “I went to see abu al-Hassan (a.s.) after the death of abu Ja‘far and offered condolences for this reason. Abu Muhammad (a.s.) was also present. He wept and abu al-Hassan (a.s.) turned to him and said, “Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, has made you to succeed him (Abi Ja’far). You must thank Allah.”
9 - علي بن محمد، عن إسحاق بن محمد، عن محمد بن يحيى بن درياب قال: دخلت على أبي الحسن عليه السلام بعد مضي أبي جعفرفعزيته عنه وأبو محمد عليه السلام جالس فبكى أبو محمد عليه السلام، فأقبل عليه أبو الحسن عليه السلام فقال [له]: إن الله تبارك وتعالىقد جعل فيك خلفا منه فاحمد الله.
Allama Majlisi, greatest Shi’i hadith scholar in modern times, explains this hadith in Mir’at al-‘Uqul (vol 3, page 390) saying:
“Allah made you (Hasan al-Askari) the successor from him (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi).
Meaning, even though he (Muhammad ibn Ali) passed away – however, the Imamate transferred from him to you!”
الحديث التاسع : مجهول « قد جعل فيك خلفا منه » الخلف بالتحريك ما يبقى بعد الشيء أي إنه وإن ذهب عنك لكن انتقل منه إليكالإمامة
Lo and behold! The Imamate transferred from Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi to his brother al-Hasan al-Askari!
This means that the badaa’ in the hadith of discussion of this post, in which Ismail is appointed and signs of Imamate pointed to him by Imam al-Sadiq –
It is a change of God’s will and determination.
The Imamate was changed from Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi (who was appointed) and given to al-Hasan al-Askari.
And as Ali al-Hadi affirmed the similarity of that case to Ismail and Musa al-Kadhim, saying Allah did badaa’ in them (as he did with Muhammad and Hasan al-Askari)
it means that Ali al-Hadi affirmed that Imam al-Sadiq literally did “indicate Ismail (as successor) and appointed him.”
Thus, according to Ali al-Hadi –
The act had quite literally happened, God changed his will and transferred the Imamate!
2 ) HIDING THE IMAMATE
Incontrovertible evidence of Ismail’s Imamate inspired Twelver Imams, such as Ali al-Hadi, to use his example in referrence to matters of Imamate.
If there were no evidence of Ismail’s appointment, he would not have been used to illustrate a change of will regarding Imamate.
Yet, Twelver narrators and clergy could not accept such a matter (change of Imamate) – because it produces questions that would crumble the foundation of their very notion of Imamate.
Thus, proto-Twelver companions and Twelver scholarship restored to hiding evidence pointing to the appointment of Ismail ibn Ja’far and Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi.
To exemplify, we shall demonstrate the following exhibit of a hadith and then proceed with the questioning:
(Al-Tusi’s Ghayba, vol 1, page 65)
“Narrated Musa ibn Bakr that he said: I was in the company of Abu Ibrahim (Musa al- Kadhim) who said:
Indeed, Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) said: A man is fortunate, who before his death - sees his successor emerging from his nafs (soul).
After that Musa al-Kadhim pointed out to his son, Ali al-Ridha and said: Almighty Allah has pointed out this son, who is my nafs, as my successor.”
- وروى أحمد بن إدريس، عن علي بن محمد بن قتيبة (3)، عن الفضل بن شاذان النيشابوري، عن محمد بن سنان وصفوان بن يحيىوعثمان بن عيسى، عن موسى بن بكر قال: كنت عند أبي إبراهيم عليه السلام فقال لي: إن جعفرا عليه السلام كان يقول: سعد امرؤ لم يمتحتى يرى خلفه من نفسه، ثم أومأ بيده إلى ابنه علي فقال: هذا وقد أراني الله خلفي من نفسي
We can now see what the definition of a son being from an Imam’s nafs (soul), means from the perspective of Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq and Musa al-Kadhim.
A son who is described as the nafs of an Imam is none but his successor, and is contradistinction to other sons of the Imam – who are merely sons:
“Indeed, Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) said: A man is fortunate, who before his death - sees his successor emerging from his nafs (soul).”
“After that Musa al-Kadhim pointed out to his son, Ali al-Ridha and said: Almighty Allah has pointed out this son, who is my nafs, as my successor.”
Given this description, we should assume that the person whom Imam al-Sadiq describes as his “nafs” – while distinguishing him from being a normal son – is his successor.
So had the Imam (as) designated whom his nafs (and thus successor is)?
(Al-Imama Wal Tabsira and Al-Kafi, vol 1, page 310)
“Narrated Tahir from Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq):
as.svg
Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) would blame his son Absullah, show him his anger and advise him saying, “What is the matter that you are not like your brother?” By Allah, I observe the light in his face.” ‘
Abdullah then said, “Why is that? Is my his father and mother not the same?”
Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) said, “He is from my soul and you are my son.”
63 - محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن جعفر بن بشير، عن فضيل، عن طاهر:
عن أبي عبد الله عليه السلام، قال:
كان يلوم عبد الله، ويعاتبه، ويعظه (5) ويقول:
ما يمنعك أن تكون مثل أخيك؟ فوالله، إني لأعرف النور في وجهه.
فقال عبد الله: أليس أبي وأبوه واحدا، وأمي وأمه واحدة؟ (6) فقال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام: إنه (7) من نفسي، وأنت ابني (8).
In this hadith, Imam al-Sadiq attempts to coax his belligerent son Abdullah into behaving like his “brother” (one of the sons of Imam al-Sadiq).
The Imam elaborates that he sees “the Light” in the face of Abdullah’s brother.
Yet – for some reason, Abdullah found imitating his brother to be an impractical standard set by Imam al-Sadiq.
Objecting against his father, Abdullah exclaimed: “Is my father and his father not the same?! Is my mother and his mother not same?!”
Imam al-Sadiq elegantly brings forth the quality exhibited by Abdullah’s brother – which distinguishes between them, and makes him worthy of being imitated by Abdullah:
“Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) said, “He (i.e, your brother) is from my soul and you are my son.”
This brings us back to Imam al-Sadiq’s words in the hadith from Tusi’s Kitab al-Ghayba.
Which son emerges from soul of the Imam, in contradistinction to any other son?
None but the successor!
“Indeed, Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) said: A man is fortunate, who before his death - sees his successor emerging from his nafs (soul).”
Knowing this fact, we can see that the discussed hadith establishes that the Imam’s nafs has similitude with Abdullah ibn Ja’far al-Sadiq:
They are of the same father and mother.
Who was the only son of Imam al-Sadiq to share the same father and mother, as Abdullah ibn Ja’far?
(Rijal al-Kashi)
“On the authority of Ali bin Jaafar, he said: I heard my brother Musa, peace be upon him, he said:
My father (al-Sadiq) said to Abdullah, my brother:
Take away your two nephews, for they have filled me with foolishness. Indeed, they are the communion of Satan - meaning
Muhammad ibn Ismail ibn Ja’far and Ali ibn Ismail.
Abdullah was (Ismail)’s brother from both his father and mother’s side.”
وروى موسى بن القاسم
البجلي، عن علي بن جعفر، قال: سمعت أخي موسى عليه السلام، قال: قال
أبي لعبد الله أخي: إليك ابني أخيك فقد ملياني بالسفه فإنهما شرك شيطان، يعنى
محمد بن إسماعيل بن جعفر وعلي بن إسماعيل، وكان عبد الله أخاه لأبيه وأمه ".
None but Ismail ibn Ja’far shared the same parents as Abdullah.
Musa ibn Ja’far was the son of Ja’far al-Sadiq, but his mother was different from Abdullah – Musa’s mother being a Berber concubine.
Noting this, we realize something striking indicated by the editor of Al-Imama Wal Tabsira (classical hadith book, written by Shaykh Saduq’s father):
“The son mentioned in the hadith is Ismail, but his name was removed from the hadith compilations”
7 - هكذا في المصادر والجوامع، وفي الأصل: إن إسماعيل
Because the later hadith compilations momitted Ismail’s name – which is present in Imama Wal Tabsira, the editor removed Ismail’s name in his copy of the book.
Yet however, we can still see Ismail’s name fully present in other copies of the book:
Saying this, I don’t think we can overstate how unusual it is to remove Ismail’s name from the hadith above.
Given that the wording evidently proves Imamah, and Kulayni includes it in his section in proving the Imamate of Musa al-Kadhim (to portray Musa to be the son from al-Sadiq’s nafs, while removing Ismail’s name).
We reach a verdict that Twelver clergy was clearly unsettled by a hadith proving Ismail’s Imamate, and hid the truth.
Yet, Twelver Imams such as Ali al-Hadi recognized such proof existed – and used Ismail’s example to justify matters of Imamate pertaining to them.
Now, as for the example of Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi.
We can see that Twelver companions attempted to manipulate and hide evidence of his Imamate, sometimes comically outside the bounds of what is expected.
The following hadith is exhibit:
(Al-Kafi)
“Ali ibn Muhammad has narrated from abu Muhammad al-Asbarqiniy from Ali ibn ‘Amr al-‘Attar who has said the following. “Once I went to see Abu al-Hassan al-‘Askari (Ali al-Hadi) when his son Abu Ja‘far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) was still alive and I thought he will be the Imam after his father. I then asked the Imam
as.svg
“May Allah take my souls in service for your cause, which of your sons I will consider (my Imam)?” The Imam said, “do not consider any of them (your Imam) until my command will come to you.”
The narrator has said, “I wrote to him afterwards asking, ‘To who will go this task (Leadership with Divine Authority)”
The narrator has said, “He wrote to me, “(It will go) to my eldest son.”
The narrator has said, “Abu Muhammad was older then Abu Ja‘far.”
ـ عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِي مُحَمَّدٍ الاسْبَارِقِينِيِّ عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ عَمْرٍو الْعَطَّارِ قَالَ دَخَلْتُ عَلَى أَبِي الْحَسَنِ الْعَسْكَرِيِّ (عَلَيْهِ السَّلام) وَأَبُو جَعْفَرٍ ابْنُهُفِي الاحْيَاءِ وَأَنَا أَظُنُّ أَنَّهُ هُوَ فَقُلْتُ لَهُ جُعِلْتُ فِدَاكَ مَنْ أَخُصُّ مِنْ وُلْدِكَ فَقَالَ لا تَخُصُّوا أَحَداً حَتَّى يَخْرُجَ إِلَيْكُمْ أَمْرِي قَالَ فَكَتَبْتُ إِلَيْهِ بَعْدُ فِيمَنْيَكُونُ هَذَا الامْرُ قَالَ فَكَتَبَ إِلَيَّ فِي الْكَبِيرِ مِنْ وَلَدَيَّ قَالَ وَكَانَ أَبُو مُحَمَّدٍ أَكْبَرَ مِنْ أَبِي جَعْفَرٍ
Recognizing that the companions still had collective memory of Ali al-Hadi appointing his son Muhammad as successor – as evident in the words of Shahawiyah:
“I used to narrate from Abu al-Hasan al-‘Askari (i.e, Imam al-Hadi) ahadith indicating Abi Ja’far (Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi) is the next Imam.”
The narrator of the above al-Kafi hadith claims that when Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi was alive, he asked Ali al-Hadi whom his successor is.
“I wrote to him afterwards asking, ‘To who will go this task (Leadership with Divine Authority)”
Ali al-Hadi replied:
The narrator has said, “He wrote to me, “(It will go) to my eldest son.”
The narrator then clarified, “ “(At that time) Abu Muhammad was older then Abu Ja‘far.”
Meaning, the narrator claimed Hasan Al-Askari was older than his brother Muhammad at that time!
If this were true, why did the bulk of Ali al-Hadi’s followers expect his son Muhammad to be his successor – if at least, the factor of “eldest son” did not work out for him?
The truth of the matter is clear:
The hadith originally served to prove the Imamate of Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi
Yet – one of the narrators in the chain (a proponent of Hasan al-Askari’s Imamate), decided to manipulate the timetable of the report and make it out to serve al-Hasan Al-Askari instead.
Thus, the verdict again is that is there is clear manipulation to hide evidence of Muhammad ibn Ali al-Hadi’s “appointment”, as happened to reports of Ismail ibn Ja’far’s appointment.
3 ) MAKING SENSE OF IT ALL
It was the 8th of Rabi’ al-Awwal in the year 260 AH (874 CE), in the desert city of Samarra’ where the Abbasid caliph resided.
The aura of this otherwise lively city, with its bustling markets, was different today. Silence defined the streets, as the messenger of the Caliph led a band of royal horsemen on their way to the city center.
Therein, the poignant news was read aloud to inhabitants of the city:
Al-Hasan al-Askari, the Caliph’s honored guest, was now dead!
This news was not normal news, and Al-Hasan Al-Askari was no normal person.
Al-Askari was a beloved Imam to a very large number of Shi’a, owing to his father Ali al-Hadi’s extensive proselytization efforts.
This means his position was highly coveted, as attaining it laid keys to the pockets of every believer in Al-Askari’s Imamate, who paid regular khums to their Imam’s money collectors.
Unfortunately for the Shi’a, Al-Askari seldom appeared publicly as he was under house arrest throughout his life.
All his few public appearances offered no guidance to the Shi’a, as he was prohibited by the caliph from engaging with the public without supervision.
This would mean that the question of whom Al-Askari’s successor would be will be highly disputed, as the Imam never publicly announced to the Shi’a who he will be.
Like one would expect, Al-Askari’s death led to his followers splintering into 13 different groups – as the famous classical heresiography Firaq al-Shi’a by Nawbakhti tells us.
One of the groups that emerged was led by Al-Askari’s brother Ja’far ibn Ali al-Hadi.
We will use the words of Ja’far below to explain to the very issue at root of our article:
The concept of badaa.
(Al-Imama Wal Tabsira)
“On the authority of Muhammad ibn Shadhan ibn Naeem, who said:
A man from the people of Balkh sent some assets as religious dues and a slip, which had a mark made with his finger saying, “as you go around”; but it had no writing.
The man said to the carrier:
Take these funds and whoever informs you of its story and gives an answer to the slip, give him these
So the man went to the Samarra, and he went to Ja’far ibn Ali al-Hadi and told him the news, so Ja’far said to him:
Do you believe in the concept of badaa’?
The carrier said: Yes.
Ja’far said to him: Badaa’ (divine change of will) has occured with regards to your companion, and he has commanded you to give me the money.
The carrier said to him: This answer does not convince me.”
165 - سعد بن عبد الله، عن أبي حامد المراغي، عن محمد بن شاذان بن نعيم، قال:
بعث رجل من أهل بلخ بمال ورقعة ليس فيها كتابة، قد خط فيها بإصبعه كما تدور من غير كتابة، وقال للرسول: احمل هذا المال، فمن أخبركبقصته، وأجاب عن الرقعة، فأوصل إليه المال.
فصار الرجل إلى العسكر، وقد قصد جعفرا، وأخبره الخبر، فقال له جعفر: تقر بالبداء؟
قال الرجل: نعم.
قال له: فإن صاحبك قد بدا له وأمرك أن تعطيني المال، فقال له الرسول: لا يقنعني هذا الجواب.
When a follower of Al-Hasan al-Askari sought to give khums to the successor of Al-Hasan Al-Askari, he was lost as to the identity of this new Imam.
Accordingly, he gave a sum of money to a carrier – instructing him to give it an Imam claimant who decodes the ‘Ilm al-Ghayb knowledge associated with this money.
When the carrier came across Ja’far ibn Ali al-Hadi, Ja’far made a startling assertion.
He asked the carrier:
“Do you believe in the concept of badaa’?”
When the carrier responded affirmatively, Ja’far claimed that Allah changed the will of the man of Balkh (the one who instructed the carrier).
That in an act of badaa’, Allah changed the will of the man of Balkh who now instructs the carrier to pay the money to Ja’far.
The carrier responded as one would reasonably expect:
“The carrier said to him: This answer does not convince me.”
What one may not expect that Jafar’s response (unappealing to a rational mind), rather does have basis of sort in the later Twelver Imams.
In his battle against the Waqifa, Ali al-Ridha asserted that Imamate can only be ascertained through being an Imam’s eldest son, virtue, and holding the Dhahir wasiya.
He made it explicitly known that the Waqifa cannot ask him questions to ascertain his Imamate:
“Answering questions does not establish any authority.”
(Al-Kafi, vol 1, page 285)
“Narrated Ahmad ibn ‘Umar who has said that he asked the following from abu al-Hassan al-Rida (a.s.):
“What is the proof that establishes one’s possessing Divine authority or the his ownership of leadership?”
Such proofs are being the eldest son, possession of superior moral achievements and one being appointed as the executor of the will. So much so that people would come to the town and ask who is appointed as the executor of the will of Fulan it would be said to them Fulan son of Fulan (aka, the dhahir wasiya) and these go along wherever the Armament would go.
Answering questions does not establish any authority.
5 - علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن يونس، عن أحمد بن عمر، عن أبي الحسن الرضا عليه السلام قال: سألته عن الدلالة علىصاحب هذا الامر، فقال: الدلالة عليه: الكبر والفضل والوصية، إذا قدم الركب المدينة فقالوا، إلى من أوصى فلان؟ قيل: فلان بن فلان، ودوروامع السلاح حيثما دار، فأما المسائل فليس فيها حجة
Boldly, when a Waqifi did ask Ali al-Ridha theological questions –
Al-Ridha said:
(Rijal al-Kashi, vol 2, page 873)
“Do not think you and your (Waqifa) companions that my letter here is a response to you.
It is up to me - if I wish to answer, I will. If I wish to be silent, that is up to me”
، ولا ترى أنت وأصحابك اني أجبت بذلك، وان شئت صمت، فذاك إلي لا ما تقوله أنت وأصحابك، لا تدرون كذا وكذا، بل لا بد من ذلك، إذنحن منه على يقين وأنتم منه في شك.
The methodology put forth by Ali al-Ridha requires belief that he is an Imam, without presenting evidence for so.
If Al-Ridha does not wish to answer questions to prove his Imamate, arguing that “answering questions does not establish any authority” –
Then the criteria underlined below, which he cited to prove Imamate cannot apply to him:
“Such proofs are being the eldest son, possession of superior moral achievements and one being appointed as the executor of the will.
So much so that people would come to the town and ask who is appointed as the executor of the will of Fulan it would be said to them Fulan son of Fulan (aka, the dhahir wasiya)”
This is because Al-Ridha is claiming Imamate, as successor of Musa al-Kadhim.
Al-Kadhim was neither the eldest son (Ismail was eldest, the 2nd eldest Abdullah lived for 70 days after the passing of Imam al-Sadiq)
Nor did al-Kadhim receive the dhahir wasiya, as most of the Shi’a believed in his brother Ismail before Ismail’s ghayba and in Abdullah after Imam al-Sadiq’s ghayba.
Being so, when Ali al-Ridha answers in position of Imam to his theological opponents:
“It is up to me - if I wish to answer, I will. If I wish to be silent, that is up to me”
His opponents see him in equal footing to Ja’far al-Kadhhab claiming, in position of Imam, that badaa’ happened.
Both unverifiable claims of Imamate.
Unsurprisingly, as with the case of Ali al-Hadi (whose Imamate by virtue is also unverifiable) –
Al-Ridha also affirmed the Imamate of Ismail, and compared his Imamate to that of Ismail:
(Rijal al-Kashi)
“Ismail was in the will of Imam al-Sadiq in Kitab al-Sadaqa, and he (Ismail) was an Imam!”
الحسن عليهما السلام، وهم اليوم مختلفون، قال: ما كانوا مجتمعين عليه، كيف يكونون مجتمعين عليه وكان مشيختكم وكبراؤكم يقولونفيإسماعيل وهم يرونه يشرب :كذا وكذا، فيقولون هذا أجود، قالوا: إسماعيل لم يكن أدخله في الوصية؟ فقال
قد كان أدخله في كتاب الصدقة وكان إمام
Ultimately, we return to the hadith of discussion of this article - when Dawud al-Ja’fari narrated from Ali al-Hadi that:
“Allah did badaa’ in Ismail after Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) after having indicated him (as successor) and appointed him.”
Once we use our Imams’ verifiable criteria (discussed in my book Misguiding the Shi’a), such as the dhahir wasiya–
We will realize that no such badaa’ (change of Allah’s will) happened. It was merely an unverifiable claim, with roots in a true event - with regards to Ismail.
The key to understanding the reality of this true event is examining the contradictory reports of badaa’ through the methodology of Imamate, in order to achieve diraya (understanding) of the reports - the definition of ma’rifa.
The result of this diraya is one:
Ismail is the appointed successor to Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq, and the Qa’im - the 7th Imam.
Thus, dear reader – I ask you to contemplate with an open mind to achieve the truth.
May Allah bless you all
Wasalaam
John Andaluso
