Akhbari
This article may require copy editing for grammar, style, cohesion, tone, or spelling. (August 2023) |
Part of a series on Shia Islam |
---|
Shia Islam portal |
Part of a series on |
Islam |
---|
Part of a series on Shia Islam |
Twelver Shi'ism |
---|
Shia Islam portal |
The Akhbārīs (
The term Akhbārī comes from khabara'at, news or reports, while
As of the twenty-first century, Akhbari form a tiny minority within Shia Islam, with Usulis making up the mainstream majority. Akhbarism started as a movement with the writings of
Background
The gist of Akhbārī ideology is that nothing but the aḥadīth of the Infallible can serve as authoritative evidence in Islam. Akhbaris consider themselves to be bounded by the "
It is reported that Imam
Akhbārīs also differ from Usūlīs in their rejection of the
Usūlism evolved on the basis of
At this time, the Shī‘a distinguished themselves from the
Initially during the
- Leading the Holy War (jihad)
- Division of the booty (qismat al-fay)
- Leading the Friday Prayer (salat al-juma)
- Putting judicial decisions into effect (tanfidh al-ahkam)
- Imposing legal penalties (iqamat al-hudud)
- Receiving the religious taxes of zakāt and khums.[13]
However, it soon became apparent that the situation caused by the lapse of functions of the Hidden Imām was extremely impractical and left the Twelver Shī‘a community at a great disadvantage, with no leadership, no organization and no financial structure.[13]
Contrary to Usulis, Akhbaris believe in the perpetuity of
History
Akhbaris contend that, over the course of the history of Twelver Shi'ism since the Occultation, Usuli ulama have progressively usurped more and more of the functions of the Hidden Imam. They believe there have been five transgressions or stages of usurpation.
First transgression
As early as the 5th century AH / 11th century CE, more than 150 years after the Occultation of the 12th Imām, Shaykhu t-Ta'ifa reinterpreted the doctrine to allow delegation of the Imām's judicial authority to those who had studied fiqh. Although he implies in his writings that this function should only be undertaken by the ulama if there is no one else to do it.
Shaykhu t-Taifa considered the ulamā' the best agents of the donor to distribute religious taxes since they knew to whom it should be distributed. Nevertheless, individuals were free to do this themselves if they wished. He allowed fuqahā' to organize Friday prayers in absence of the Imām or his special representative.
The prominent Shī‘a scholars who rejected this thesis were:
- `Alam al-Huda (who was from among the Shaykhu t-Taifa's group)
- Ibn Idris
- Allamah al-Hilli[13]
Second transgression
By the 13th century, Muhaqqiq al-Hilli was able to advance these concepts further, by extending the judicial role of the ulama to iqamat al-hudud -- the imposition of penalties by ulama themselves. In his writings it is possible to see the evolution in his thinking whereby the
Third transgression
Muhaqqiq al-Karkhi (About 300 years after the second transgression) was the first to suggest, arguing from the hadith of ‘Umar ibn Hanzala, that the ulama were the Nā'ib al-'Amm (general representative) of the Hidden Imām. But he restricted his application of this argument to the assumption of the duty of leading Friday prayers.[17]
Fourth transgression
It was Shahīd ath-Thānī (Zayn al-Din al-Juba'i al'Amili) who took the concept of Nā'ib al-'Amm to its logical conclusion in the religious sphere and applied it to all of the religious functions and prerogatives of the Hidden Imām. Thus the judicial authority of the ulamā' now became a direct reflection of the authority of the Imām himself. It was now obligatory to pay the religious taxes directly to the ulamā' as the trustees of the Imām for distribution and the donor who distributed these himself was considered to obtain no reward. This is in direct contradiction to limits set by prior transgressions.[17]
Furthermore, Shahīd ath-Thānī extended the range of those eligible to receive money from zakāt to include religious students and the ulamā' themselves, who thus became the recipients of the money as trustees of students. Even in the field of defensive jihād, Shahīd ath-Thānī identified a role for the ulamā', (but not in offensive jihād where he agreed with Akhbari that the role of Hidden Imām had lapsed pending his return).[17]
Although the aforementioned scholars were not mujtahids in their full capacity, they introduced innovative concepts into Shī‘a theology which later formed the basis of the exegetical school. Their innovations were not accepted by prominent Shī‘a scholars of their time and thus, remained mostly theoretical.
The traditional Shī‘a doctrine was, by its nature, fatal to the leadership of any regime except that of Imām al-Mahdi since they believed that an Islamic state can be established only under the leadership of an infallible Imām. Thus, the Shī‘a had little role to play in supporting the decisions of the state, in contrast with the Sunni tendency of offering their full support to the Ottoman Empire.
This caused a great deal of paranoia to the states where the Shī‘a were in majority. By the end of
The revival of Akhbārism, or "neo-Akhbārism" as it became known, was under the dean of Karbala scholarship,
Al-Bahrani's neo-Akhbarism accepted only two sources for Imami jurisprudence, the Qur'an and the oral reports from the Imams. He did not, however, go so far as to say that no verse in the Qur'an could be understood without the interpretation of the Imams, a position held by the Safavid-era Akhbari Astarabadi which Shaykh Yusuf denounced as extremist. He rejected the Usuli principles of consensus (ijma`) and independent reasoning (`aql, ijtihad). Indeed, he questioned rationalist approaches to religion in general, quoting with approval a condemnation of reading philosophy and theosophy. But Shaykh Yusuf accepted the validity of Friday prayers in the Occultation and did not completely reject Usuli positions on other issues. His Bahrani neo-Akhbarism sought to be an intermediate path between extremist Usulism and extremist Akhbarism.[19]
Ayatollah Behbahani
Under al-Bahrani, Usuli scholarship was considered impure but Bahrani was not politically influential. It was Muhammad Baqir ibn Muhammad Akmal al-Wahid Behbahani who challenged and defeated the Akhbaris and eventually became the most politically influential cleric in Karbala in 1772. Bihbahani's theology was not welcomed by the Akhbaris. Although this controversy had begun as a minor disagreement on a few points, it eventually grew into a bitter, vituperative dispute culminating in Behbahani's declaration that the Akhbārīs were infidels (Kuffar).[8] However, the dispute remained purely intellectual.
At first there was a large population of Akhbārī activists at the shrine cities of Iraq but it was Bihbahani who, at the end of the 18th century, reversed this and completely routed the Akhbārīs at Karbala and Najaf. South Iraq, Bahrain and a few cities in Iran such as Kirman remained Akhbārī strongholds for a few more decades but eventually the Usuli triumph was complete and only a handful of Shī‘a ulamā' remained Akhbārī to the present day.[8]
After the theological coup brought about by al-Wahid Bihbahani by military methods, the Usuli school became instrumental to the Iranian regime.
Fifth transgression
During the first
This followed the pattern of other transgressions by overthrowing the limits of its prior (fourth) transgression.
Iranian Revolution
Following the Iranian Revolution, the Usūlī school has gained popularity among previously Akhbārī communities.[7] Usuli clerical power reached its natural conclusion with control and domination of the state as promulgated through Vilayat al-Faqih under the authority of the Supreme Leader.
Rejection of the Mujtahids
Akhbārīs reject mujtahids. They practice this based on the last letter Imām Mahdi wrote to ‘Alī ibn Muhammad, fourth trusted follower of the Lesser Occultation. In the letter, Imām Zaman said:
If someone claims himself as deputy of Imam during occultation he is a liar, ousted from Allah’s religion, calumniating Allah; he himself has gone astray and is leading others into error too. He will always be in loss. Be Curse unto him of mine, of Allah, of Allah’s Rasool (SW) and of his Progeny (AS) for every moment, and in all circumstances.[21]
Akhbārīs claim that only the Imāms may be described as āyat Allahs (
O Tariq, Imam (as) is the Kalama-t-Allāh [Word of God], Waj'ha-t-Allah [Face of God], Hijaba-t-Allah [Veil of God], Nūru-Allah [Light of God], Āya-t-Allah [Sign of God]
Historically it was only in the early 19th century that ordinary mujtahids began to describe themselves as 'Ayatollahs.'[dubious ]
Prominent Akhbari scholars
This article's list of people may not follow Wikipedia's verifiability policy. (March 2017) |
- ʿAbdullāh ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Samāhījī
- al-Shaykh al-Saduq
- Muhammad ibn Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī
- Muḥammad Baqer Majlesi Akhbari
- Muhammad Taqi Majlesi
- Al-Hurr al-Amilī Akhbārī
- Mirza Ḥusayn Nūrī Tabarsi
- Mirza Muhammad al-Akhbari
- Mirza Muhammad Kamil Dehlavi
- Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi
- Muhammad Baqir Behbahani
- Qazi Nurullah Shushtarī
- Sheikh Hassan Allahyari
- Salih Al-Karzakani
- Yusuf al-Bahrani
See also
References
- ^ "Akhbari". akhbari.com.
- ^ "Welcome to Akhbari.com". akhbari.org.
- ^ Gleave, Scripturalist Islam, 2007: p.xvi
- ^ "Welcome to Akhbari.com". akhbari.org.
- ISBN 978-0-85398-201-2
- ^ "Online Shia Islamic Articles, Books, Khutbat, Calendar 2013, Duas". hubeali.com.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-393-06211-3
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85398-201-2
- ^ Bahar al-Anwar Vol. 53, p. 181
- ^ Kohlberg, E. "AḴBĀRĪYA". Encyclopædia Iranica. Retrieved 24 April 2016.
- ^ a b "Belief of Shi'a in the Completeness of Qur'an | A Shi'ite Encyclopedia | Books on Islam and Muslims". Al-Islam.org. 2013-11-12. Retrieved 2013-12-31.
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85398-201-2
- ^ ISBN 978-0-85398-201-2
- ^ "The Stages of Development of Shi'a Jurisprudence". Al-Islam.org. 2016-08-15.
- ^ "Our Misfortune Regarding Ijtihad Against the Texts | Books on Islam and Muslims". Al-Islam.org. 2012-10-15. Retrieved 2013-12-31.
- ^ "History of Khalifa Umar bin al-Khattab – Testament and Assessment of Umar – Section 16 – Islamic History". alim.org. Archived from the original on 2020-11-24. Retrieved 2017-06-16.
- ^ a b c d Moojan Momen, An introduction to Shi'i Islam, p.190
- ^
Cole, Juan Ricardo (2002), Sacred space and holy war : the politics, culture and history of Shi'ite Islam, IB Tauris, pp. 58–78, ISBN 978-1-86064-736-9
- ISBN 978-1-86064-736-9
- ISBN 978-0-85398-201-2
- ^ Bihar al-Anwar, Allamah Majlisi
- ^ Hadith-e-Tariq
Bibliography
- Rival Empires of Trade and Imami Shiism in Eastern Arabia, 1300-1800, Juan Cole, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 19, No. 2, (May 1987), pp. 177–203
- Andrew J. Newman, The Nature of the Akhbārī/Uṣūlī Dispute in Late Ṣafawid Iran. Part 1: 'Abdallāh al-Samāhijī's "Munyat al-Mumārisīn Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 55, No. 1 (1992), pp. 22–51
- Killing of Prophet Muhammad's daughter
- Gleave, Robert (2007). Scripturalist Islam : The History and Doctrines of the Akhbārī Shīʿī School. Brill. Retrieved 6 September 2023.