Misguiding the Zaidiyya
The Hijaz of the 8th century CE was a turbulent where religious zeal and violence would often collide.
It was a state of being that was unpleasant to commoners, yet Alids of noble prophetic origin saw ample fertile ground to fulfill their ambition for kingship.
They had insatiable hunger for dominion, which they were long deprived of by their Qurayshi cousins from Banu Umayya and Banu al-Abbas.
Among the Alids who rose during this time were Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn al-Hasan and Husayn ibn Ali al-Fakhi.
In my previous article – we provided examples on how Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) utilized taqiyya to hide his negative stance on Muhammad ibn Abdullah’s rebellion.
We also presented nine reports from Zaydi ahadith on how Imam al-Sadiq made use of ‘Ilm al-Ghayb to caution against joining Muhammad’s failed rebellion against authority.
Similarly, the purpose this article is to display how Imam Musa al-Kadhim (as) – third eldest son of Ja’far al-Sadiq and leader of the Musawi denomination of the Imamiyyah Shi’a – utilized his father’s methods in dealing with a prominent Zaydi claimant.
That claimant was Husayn ibn Ali al-Fakhi, who was killed brutally along all his supporters in the 786 CE Battle of Fakh.
So without further adue
Let us begin!
––
1 ) A CONFUSING TALE
In our attempt to reconstruct the character of Musa al-Kadhim from an outside perspective –
We shall resort to the respected and well-regarded Zaydi historical source, Maqatil al-Talibiyeen.
Firstly, it is revealed to us that Musa al-Kadhim was no ordinary scholar descended from the Prophet Muhammad.
Despite not manning any army, he had diehard followers (Shi’a) who saw him as their spiritual leader.
It is to the extent that if Musa al-Kadhim said “Kill so and so”, they would do without question.
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen)
“There was a man from the family of Umar ibn Al-Khattab who used to insult Ali ibn Abi Talib whenever he saw Musa ibn Ja'far and would harm him when they met.
Some of Musa’s followers and Shi’a (i.e, partisans) said to him, "Let us kill him."
He (Musa al-Kadhim) replied, "No."
أن رجلا من آل عمر بن الخطاب كان يشتم علي بن أبي طالب إذا رأى موسى ابن جعفر، ويؤذيه إذا لقيه، فقال له بعض مواليه وشيعته: دعنانقتله، فقال: لا
Musa ibn Ja’far was thus a leader of significant spiritual standing among a group of Shi’a.
Therefore, when Husayn al-Fakhi rose, he saw tazkiya (authorization) from Musa ibn Ja’far as a necessary maneuvur to gain enough followers for his rebellion.
Al-Husayn had claimed that he consulted Musa ibn Ja’far and that Musa commanded him (and his followers) to revolt:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen):
“Ali ibn al-Abbas narrated to us, he said: Hasan ibn Muhammad narrated to us, from Ahmad ibn Kathir al-Dhahabi, he said: Ibrahim ibn Ishaq al-Qattan narrated to us, he said: I heard al-Husayn ibn Ali (al-Fakhi) and Yahya ibn Abdullah saying:
"We did not leave until we consulted our family members, and we consulted Musa ibn Ja'far, who commanded us to revolt."
حدثنا علي بن العباس، قال: حدثنا الحسن بن محمد، عن أحمد بن كثير الذهبي، قال: حدثنا إبراهيم بن إسحاق القطان «٢» ، قال سمعتالحسين بن علي، ويحيى بن عبد الله يقولان:
ما خرجنا حتى شاورنا أهل بيتنا، وشاورنا موسى بن جعفر فأمرنا بالخروج
Whatever authorization to revolt which Husayn claimed to receive from Musa ibn Ja’far –
It was clearly not something known to the masses.
If the masses had known about it, then the Abbasids with their behemoth intelligence networks would have known about it.
Yet – we find the Abbasid prince al-Sari ibn Abdullah, close to the governor of Medina - Musa ibn Isa - adamantly denying Musa ibn Ja’far ever had any rebellious or anti-Abbasid inclinations.
Al-Sari says, addressing the survivors of the Battle of Fakh:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen)
“By Allah, unjust rebellion like yours will only bring humiliation.
If only you (Hasanid rebel leaders of Fakh) were like your Husaynid cousin, Musa ibn Ja'far. If only you were like him.
For he (Musa), recognized the rights of his Abbasid cousins to rulership and their virtue over him. He does not seek what is not rightfully his, from rulership)
فقال السري: والله ما يزيدكم البغي إلّا ذلّة، ولو كنتم مثل بني عمكم سلمتم- يعني موسى بن جعفر- وكنتم مثله، فقد عرف حق بني عمّهوفضّلهم عليه، فهو لا يطلب ما ليس له.
While one may be tempted to reject Al-Sari’s account of Musa al-Kadhim’s character, simply due to his Abbasid association.
Al-Sari’s description is actually backed by the words of Musa al-Kadhim himself, when Husayn went to consult him:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen)
“Husayn consulted Musa ibn Ja'far about revolting.
Musa ibn Ja’far said:
“Indeed, you will be killed, and your blood will be shed. For the people are corrupt, they show faith outwardly while harboring hypocrisy and polytheism within. Verily, we belong to Allah and to Him we shall return. And with Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, I seek refuge for you as a group”
قال: وقال الحسين لموسى بن جعفر في الخروج فقال له: إنك مقتول فأحدّ الضراب فإن القوم فسّاق يظهرون إيمانا، ويضمرون نفاقا وشركا،فإنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون، وعند الله عز وجل أحتسبكم من عصبة
Musa al-Kadhim’s reluctance to rise with Husayn is further backed when al-Kadhim bowed down to his knees - pleading with Husayn to relieve him from the task of revolting:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen)
“Anizah Al-Qasbani told me, he said:
"I saw Musa ibn Ja'far after darkness had fallen, and he came to Al-Husayn al-Fakhi.
Musa bowed down to to Husayn almost in prostration and said:
“I would like for you to absolve me and relieve me fighting with you”
Al-Husayn remained silent for a long time without responding to him. Then he lifted his head towards him and said, 'You are absolved’”
ن الفرات، قال: حدثني عنيزة القصباني، قال:
رأيت موسى بن جعفر بعد عتمة وقد جاء إلى الحسين صاحب فخ، فانكب عليه شبه الركوع وقال: أحب أن تجعلني في سعة وحل من تخلفيعنك، فأطرق
الحسين طويلا لا يجيبه، ثم رفع رأسه إليه فقال: أنت في سعة.
So what exactly is happening here?
2 ) MISGUIDING THE ZAIDIYYA
From a Zaydi perspective, Husayn al-Fakhi was a righteous Imam.
He could be wrong in his judgements, but he could not have been a liar.
Husayn gave legitimacy to his revolt by proclaiming that:
“We consulted Musa ibn Ja'far, who commanded us to revolt."
He asserted that Musa ibn Ja’far ordered the revolt.
Yet however, other witnessed showed Musa warning Husayn that he will be killed if he proceeds:
“Indeed, you will be killed, and your blood will be shed. For the people are corrupt, they show faith outwardly while harboring hypocrisy and polytheism within”
This poses a difficult question:
If we agree that Husayn al-Fakhi is not a liar.
Then, at the very least – does it not mean that Musa deliberately gave him bad advice by ordering him to revolt?
Because Musa knew that that the outcome of the revolt is that Husayn and his group would be killed.
So ordering him to revolt would be bad practical advice.
It would be Musa throwing Husayn into destruction – something the Quran warns against:
“And not throw your hands into destruction. And do good, indeed Allah loves good-doers” (2:195)
Now –
While one may find Musa’s actions confusing, it definitely has precedent in the actions of his father Ja’far.
In utilizing taqiyya, Ja’far proclaimed that Zaydi rebel leader Muhammad ibn Abdullah is the Mahdi of Ahlulbayt:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen, page 187)
“Umar ibn Abdullah informed me, he said: Umar ibn Shabba narrated to us, he said: Ja'far inn Muhammad ibn Ismail Al-Hashimi narrated to me, he said: My father narrated to me, from his father, he said:
"I and Ja'far (al-Sadiq) were leaning in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) when suddenly a man on a mule rushed in. Ja’far stood next to him, placing his hand on the mule's bridle.
Then Ja’far returned, so I asked him about the man.
Ja’far said: 'Indeed, you are ignorant of him. This is Muhammad ibn Abdullah, our Mahdi of Ahlul-Bayt.'"
أخبرني عمر بن عبد الله، قال: حدثنا عمر بن شبة، قال: حدّثني جعفر بن محمد بن إسماعيل الهاشمي، قال: حدثني أبي، عن أبيه، قال:
كنت أنا وجعفر متكئين في مسجد رسول الله (ص) إذ وثب فزعا إلى رجل على بغل، فوقف معه ناحية واضعا يده على معرفة البغل، ثم رجعفسألته عنه، فقال: إنك لجاهل به، هذا محمد بن عبد الله مهدينا أهل البيت
Yet – at the other times, we Jafar clearly denying Muhammad ibn Abdullah’s Mahdihood.
He does so, citing “Kitab Ali” (i.e, Kitab al-Jafr) – a book of divinely inspired prophecies foretelling the future:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen, page 108)
“And Jaʿfar ibn Muḥammad came to ʿAbdullāh ibn al- Ḥasan who welcomed him.
Jaʿfar told him: ‘Do not perform this [revolt], as it is not the right time for this matter.
If you - ʿAbdullāh - see that this son of yours (Muhammad) is the Mahdī, then he is not the Mahdi it nor is it this (the Mahdi’s) time.”
While the Zaydi believer will find such definite contradictions in the words of Imams al-Sadiq and Musa al-Kadhim to be perplexing, and makes then ask:
Why could the Imams have given one true answer, while the other must be false?
Ja’fari sources have identified the cause of this distinctive pattern, in the words of our Imams:
(Mukhtasar Basa’ir al-Darajat, page 94)
“On the authority of Yunus ibn Abdul Rahman on the authority of Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Ammar on the authority of one of our companions who narrated it to him on the authority of Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) said a man came.
When Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) looked at the man, Abu Abdullah said, “By God, I will misguide him. By God, I will mislead him.”
When the man sat down, he asked the Imam about a matter and the Imam issued him a fatwa on it.
When the man left, Abu Abdullah (al-Sadiq) said: “I have given him a fatwa to misguide him - a type of (fatwa) containing only misguidance and no guidance in it.
Then the man came to Abu al-Hasan (al-Kadhim, and when Abu al-Hasan looked at him, he said:
“By God, I will truly misguide him.”
So the man asked (al-Kadhim) about that particular issue (which he asked al-Sadiq), so al-Kadhim gave him a fatwa.
The man said: “Impossible! Impossible! I have asked your father about this and he gave me a different fatwa. It is obligatory upon me to never leave his order - ever.”
Abu al-Hasan, peace be upon him, said: By God, I have given him a fatwa containing only guidance and no misguidance.”
الاسناد عن يونس بن عبد الرحمن عن محمد بن
إسحاق بن عمار عمن حدثه من أصحابنا عن أبي عبد الله (ع) قال جاء رجل فلما نظر إليه أبو عبد الله " ع " قال اما والله لا ضله اما واللهلأوهمنه فجلس الرجل فسأله مسألة فأفتاه فلما خرج قال أبو عبد الله " ع " لقد افتيته بالضلالة
التي لا هداية فيها ثم إن الرجل جاء إلي أبي الحسن [ع] فلما نظر اليه أبو الحسن [ع] قال اما والله لأضلنه بحق فسأله الرجل عن تلكالمسألة بعينها فأفتاه فقال الرجل هيهات هيهات لقد سألت عنها أباك فأفتاني بغير هذا وما يجب علي ان ادع قوله ابدا فلما خرج قال أبوالحسن " ع " اما والله لقد افتيته بالهداية التي لا ضلالة فيها.
Our Imams sometimes gave fatwas to misguide people:
“A type of (fatwa) containing only misguidance and no guidance in it.”
Knowing it’s what the asker wanted to hear, and the Imams wanted him to continue in his misguidance.
Other times, the Imams would give fatwas to guide people.
However, because the asker did not want to hear it – he will be misguided.
Imam al-Kadhim said:
“Then the man came to Abu al-Hasan (al-Kadhim, and when Abu al-Hasan looked at him, he said:
“By God, I will truly misguide him.”
So the man asked (al-Kadhim) about that particular issue (which he asked al-Sadiq), so al-Kadhim gave him a fatwa.
The man said: “Impossible! Impossible! I have asked your father about this and he gave me a different fatwa. It is obligatory upon me to never leave his order - ever.”
Abu al-Hasan, peace be upon him, said: By God, I have given him a fatwa containing only guidance and no misguidance.”
With that –
The riddle of our Imams’ contradictory fatwas towards Zaydi Imams is resolved.
The Imams gave them fatwas containing misguidance (i.e, recognizing Muhammad ibn Abdullah as the Mahdi and ordering Husayn al-Fakhi to revolt)
Because the Imams knew that is the answer those figures wanted to hear and sought to misguide them:
It is an act of taqiyya (dissimulation), which is within our Imams’ authority to misguide whomever they want, as the manifestation of God who proclaims in the Quran:
“Then Allah misguides whomever He wills and guides whoever He wills” (Quran 14:4)
In other instances, the Imams shared the true answer (i.e, Muhammad ibn Abdullah is not the Mahdi, Husayn al-Fakhi’s revolt will fail)
These are answers containing guidance and no misguidance.
The Imams shared them so the Shi’a knew the truth behind the matter, and because they knew that those named figures wouldn’t accept them anyway – as their fate is to be misguided.
What questions does this pose?
3 ) THE ILLUSION OF CONSENSUS
As a sect, Zaydism is built on the foundation of revolution against tyrannical authority under the banner of Al Muhammad.
Being so, they identify Al Muhammad as the descendants of Imam Hasan and Husayn.
To legitimize their cause, they claim that there was a unanimous agreement among the leadership of the Hasanids and Husaynids about core Zaydi tenets.
To elaborate, the pre-eminent Zaydi Imam Al-Qasim ibn Ibrahim al-Rassi stated that:
(Majmu’ al-Sayyid Humaydan)
"I have witnessed the leadership of the descendants of Hasan and Husayn, and there is no disagreement among any of them."
– أدركتُ مَشيخَة آل محمّد مِن وَلد الحَسن والحُسين وَمَا بَين أحَدٍ مِنهم اختلاف
When speaking of the “leadership of the descendants of Hasan and Husayn”, al-Qassim al-Rassi definitely included his contemporary Musa ibn Ja’far.
Najashi (the esteemed Ja’fari bibliographer) states:
(Rijal al-Najashi)
"Al-Qassim ibn Ibrahim al-Rassi has a book in which he narrates from his father and others, from Ja'far ibn Muhammad, and he narrates directly from Musa ibn Ja'far (peace be upon him)."
– لهُ كِتابٌ يَرويه عَن أبيه وَغَيره ، عَن جَعفر بن محمّد ورَواه هُو عَن مُوسى بن جَعفر عَليه السلام
This indicates Al-Qassim Al-Rassi was a contemporary of Musa ibn Ja’far, whom as elaborated above – was a significant leader of amomg Husaynids.
Hence, Husayn al-Fakhi sought Musa ibn Jafar’s consultation before revolting.
Al-Rassi being a contemporary of Musa is further backed by a Zaydi narration im which he reports narrates directly from Musa ibn Ja’far:
(Amali Imam Ahmad ibn Isa ibn Zaid)
“Qasim ibn Ibrahim informed me, that Musa ibn Ja'far said to a man, "Do not perform Qunoot, and whatever befalls you is upon me."
– وأخبرَني قَاسِمُ بن إبرَاهيم، عَن مُوسى بن جعفر أنّه قال لرجلٍ :لا تَقنُت ، وَمَا أصَابَك فَهُو فِي رقبتي
Two major problems arise, knowing this fact:
A) Doubt is raised on the historicity of the Zaydi belief in the consensus of the early Hasanids and Husaynids.
What Al-Qassim Al-Rassi proclaimed he knew of the “lack of disagreement among any of them (Hasanids and Husayns).”
This seems to be secret knowledge, which the general public was not aware of.
The Abbasids were not certainly aware that Musa ibn Ja’far supported the Zaydi cause – thus the knowledge could not have been public:
(Maqatil al-Talibiyeen)
“By Allah, unjust rebellion like yours will only bring humiliation.
If only you (Hasanid rebel leaders of Fakh) were like your Husaynid cousin, Musa ibn Ja'far. If only you were like him.
For he (Musa), recognized the rights of his Abbasid cousins to rulership and their virtue over him. He does not seek what is not rightfully his, from rulership)
فقال السري: والله ما يزيدكم البغي إلّا ذلّة، ولو كنتم مثل بني عمكم سلمتم- يعني موسى بن جعفر- وكنتم مثله، فقد عرف حق بني عمّهوفضّلهم عليه، فهو لا يطلب ما ليس له.
Knowing this, Zaydis cannot reject the fact our Imams considered themselves to be infallible leaders of the Ja’fariyya –
Simply based on Zaydi leaders claiming there existed “a consensus among the leadership of Al Muhammad”.
Because if Zaydis reject the Ja’fari conception of our Imams as “secret knowledge” (despite it being corroborated in Zaydi sources)
Then Jafaris can also reject the Zaydi consensus as unverifiable, “secret knowledge”.
B) If we are to trust al-Qassim al-Rassi’s words.
If Musa al-Kadhim did express his espousal of Zaydi beliefs privately.
Then we cannot discount deliberate misguidance and taqiyya, as he and his father had done (as discussed above).
The motivations of Musa al-Kadhim in expressing Zaydism are put to doubt.
Therefore,
Musa al-Kadhim’s usage of taqiyya makes us reconstruct his character as being closer to the Ja’fari perspective (i.e, claimant to divine leadership)
And God knows best.
I hope this was a beneficial read
Wasalaam
John Andaluso
