Liar of Kufa
The year of 138 AH (755 CE) was a very precarious time for the Ja'fari movement.
On one hand, Zaydi movements conducted extensive - yet, ultimately unsuccessful - campaigns to woo the followers of Imam al-Sadiq into their revolutionary cause.
On the other hand, Abbasid authorities were intensifying their surveillance and persecution of the Imam's followers.
Things only took a turn for the worst, as the most unexpected had happened:
Zurara narrates that Imam al-Sadiq said:
“A liar has appeared among the people of Kūfa"
عَنْ زُرَارَةَ، قَالَ، قَالَ يَعْنِي أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ (ع) إِنَّ أَهْلَ الْكُوفَةِ قَدْ نَزَلَ فِيهِمْ كَذَّابٌ
This liar was a man of such stellar credentials in the eyes of the Shi'a, being seen as the Imam's gate and deputy, that he managed to misguide the majority of Kufa's Shia into his movement.
He was no other than:
Abu al-Khattab.
(Rijal al-Kashi)
Imam al-Ridha said:
“Abū al-Khaṭṭāb had corrupted most of the people of Kūfa, and they would not pray the Maghrib (sunset prayer) until the twilight had completely disappeared. But that (delaying Maghrib) is only for the traveler, or the one in fear, or the person with an urgent need.”
* (99) * 50 - وروى أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى عن سعيد بن جناح عن بعض أصحابنا عن الرضا عليه السلام قال: ان أبا الخطاب قدكان أفسد عامة أهل الكوفة، وكانوا لا يصلون المغرب حتى يغيب الشفق وإنما ذلك للمسافر والخائف ولصاحب الحاجة.
Abu al-Khattab based his order to the Kufans to postpone Maghrib, directly to a hadith he attributed to al-Sadiq (as), which the Imam dismissed as a blatant “fabrication”.
(Rijal al-Kashi)
Narrated Zurārah, who said:
As for Abū al-Khaṭṭāb, he has lied about me.
He claimed that I commanded him that neither he nor his followers should pray the Maghrib (sunset prayer) until they see a certain star called al-Qundānī.
وَ أَمَّا أَبُو الْخَطَّابِ: فَكَذَبَ عَلَيَّ قَالَ إِنِّي أَمَرْتُهُ أَنْ لَا يُصَلِّيَ هُوَ وَ أَصْحَابُهُ الْمَغْرِبَ حَتَّى يَرَوْا كَوْكَبَ كَذَا يُقَالُ لَهُ الْقُنْدَانِيُّ، وَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ ذَلِكَ لَكَوْكَبٌمَا أَعْرِفُهُ
The purpose of this article is to investigate how such a consensus among the Kufan Shi'a - upholding Abu al-Khattab's position - even existed in the first place, despite continuous insistence by Imam al-Sadiq that Abu al-Khattab is a liar.
So without further ado
Let us begin!
--
A) THE TRUE FUQAHA
As stated in the first part of our Abu al-Khattab series,
"The recognition of taqiyya and discernment of its purpose and intention is the definition of a true faqih - a man of true knowledge and discernment - in eyes of our Imams"
This concept is highlighted in the following report:
(Al-Kafi)
Abu ʿAbdullah (peace be upon him) said:
“A single report that you have diraya of (i.e, true understanding) is better than ten that you merely transmit. For every truth has a reality, and every correct matter has a light.”
Then he said:
“By Allah, we do not consider a man among our Shi‘a to be a true faqih until when something is spoken to him with a lahn (i.e, hints of taqiyya), he recognizes the lahn.”
قال أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): خبر تدريه خير من عشر ترويه، إن لكل حق حقيقة، ولكل صواب نورا، ثم قال: إنا والله لا نعد الرجل منشيعتنا فقيها حتى يلحن له فيعرف اللحن
Essentially -
When the Imam utters words of taqiyya, the faqih will recognize the true (batin) meaning and leave aside the outward (dhahir) meaning.
Meanwhile, commoners are likely to take upon the dhahir meaning and leave aside the true meaning.
By submitting to the Imam's dhahir orders, commoners satisfy the requirement of tasleem (total submission) to the Imam's words,
Whereas the faqih will go beyond tasleem to discern the true meaning of the order - beyond the layers of taqiyya covering it - and thus, attain ma'rifa (true comprehension of the Imam).
As a demonstration of tafaqquh (excercising the duties of the faqih), we are led to the example of Shihab ibn Abd Rabbuh:
(Rijal al-Kashi)
Narrated Shihāb b. ‘Abd Rabbuh, who said:
Abū ‘Abd Allāh (peace be upon him) said to me:
“O Shihāb, killing will become widespread among a household from Quraysh, until a man from among them will be called to the caliphate, yet he will refuse it.”
Then he said: “O Shihāb, do not say that I am referring to these cousins of mine.”
Shihāb said: “I bear witness that he did indeed refer to them!”
453 - عنه، عن أحمد بن محمد، عن علي بن الحكم. عن هشام بن سالم، عن شهاب بن عبد ربه قال: قال لي أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): ياشهاب يكثر القتل في أهل بيت من قريش حتى يدعى الرجل منهم إلى الخلافة فيأباها، ثم قال: يا شهاب ولا تقل: إني عنيت بني عمي (5) هؤلاء، قال شهاب: أشهد أنه قد عناهم.
In a meeting attended by his cousins from Banu al-Hasan - whom Imam al-Sadiq had previously chastized for their envy towards him & their relentless, worldly pursuit of power -
The Imam prophesied that killing would become so widespread among a household from Quraysh (i.e, due to their reckless rebellions, many of their members will be killed).
The Imam then pointed to his cousins and said:
"O Shihāb, do not say that I am referring to these cousins of mine (i.e, Banu al-Hasan")
These words of Imam al-Sadiq now pose a question to us:
How would the commoner Shi'a treat this order by the Imam towards Shihab?
They would take the words literally, Imam al-Sadiq forbid interpreting his hadith with Banu al-Hasan.
But how did Shihab excercise tafaqquh here?
He realized the true meaning of Imam al-Sadiq's words and said:
"Shihāb said: “I bear witness that he did indeed refer to them!”
قال شهاب: أشهد أنه قد عناهم.
B) A LIAR OR SAINT?
Zurara ibn A'yan, a top-ranking companion of Imams al-Baqir and al-Sadiq, is perhaps best characterized by the following hadith of Imam al-Sadiq:
(Rijal al-Kashi)
"Abū ʿAbd Allāh (peace be upon him) said:
“May Allah have mercy on Zurārah ibn Aʿyan.
Were it not for Zurārah and those like him, the traditions (hadiths) of my father (peace be upon him) would have been lost (wiped out).”
قال أبو عبد الله (عليه السلام): " رحم الله زرارة بن أعين لولا زرارة ونظرائه لاندرست أحاديث أبي (عليه السلام) ".
Such a man, who extensively transmitted ahadith from Imams al-Baqir and al-Sadiq, entered upon al-Sadiq (as) one day and presented the following hadith:
"Zurara said to al-Sadiq: ‘Al-Ḥakam b. ‘Utaybah has narrated from your father that he said to him: Pray Maghrib (during Hajj) before reaching al-Muzdalifah."
Al-Hakam ibn Utaybah was a very prominent Sunni scholar at that time.
Imam al-Sadiq responded to the hadith Zurara narrated from Hakam by saying
Abū ‘Abd Allāh (al-Sadiq) swore by Allah three times:
‘My father (al-Baqir) never said this at all. Al-Ḥakam b. ‘Utaybah has lied about my father.’
Then - in a surprising twist,
Zurara appears to defy the Imam's judgement and says:
"I do not think al-Ḥakam lied about his father (i.e, al-Baqir)
Hadith:
(Rijal al-Kashi)
From ‘Īsā b. Abī Manṣūr, Abū Usāmah, and Ya‘qūb al-Aḥmar, who said:
“We were sitting with Abū ‘Abd Allāh (peace be upon him) when Zurārah b. A‘yan entered.
He said to him: ‘Al-Ḥakam b. ‘Utaybah has narrated from your father that he said to him: Pray Maghrib before reaching al-Muzdalifah.’
Abū ‘Abd Allāh (peace be upon him) swore by Allah three times:
‘My father never said this at all. Al-Ḥakam b. ‘Utaybah has lied about my father.’
Zurārah then left, saying:
‘I do not think al-Ḥakam lied about his father.’”
عن عيسى بن أبي منصور وأبي أسامة، ويعقوب الاحمر، قالوا: كنا جلوسا عند أبي عبد الله عليه السلام فدخل زرارة بن أعين، فقال له: إنالحكم بن عتيبة، روى عن أبيك أنه قال له: صل المغرب، دون المزدلفة، فقال له أبو عبد الله عليه السلام بأيمان ثلاثة: ما قال أبي هذا قط، كذبالحكم بن عتيبة على أبي. قال: فخرج زرارة وهو يقول: ما أرى الحكم كذب على أبيه
However, as the common adage goes,
"Don't judge a book by its cover".
What appears as an objection by Zurara to Imam al-Sadiq's judgement, is actually an expert utilization of tafaqquh.
When Zurara uttered the following words:
"I do not think al-Ḥakam lied about his father (i.e, al-Baqir)"
He said them knowing that Imam al-Baqir would often issue fatwas acceptable to the Sunni clergy, due to fear from Bani Umayyah.
Naturally, al-Hakam (a Sunni scholar) would be a recipient of such fatwas.
Whereas, Imam al-Sadiq had no such fear from Bani Umayyah and thus would issue fatwas dissimilar to the Umayyad-era Sunni clergy:
(Tahdhib al-Ahkam)
Abān b. Taghlib, who said:
“I heard Abū ‘Abd Allāh (al-Sadiq) say:
‘My father (al-Baqir) used to give a legal ruling during the time of the Banū Umayyah that whatever the falcon or hawk kills is permissible — and he did so out of precaution (taqiyyah) toward them.
But I do not practice precaution toward them. Whatever the falcon or hawk kills is forbidden.’”
وعنهم عن سهل عن أحمد بن محمد بن أبي نصر عن المفضل بن صالح عن أبان بن تغلب قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: كانأبي يفتى في زمن بنى أمية ان ما قتل البازي والصقر فهو حلال وكان يتقيهم وانا لا أتقيهم
وهو حرام ما قتل
Now the obvious question is:
If al-Hakam ibn Utayba received a fatwa in taqiyya from Imam al-Baqir.
Why exactly would Imam al-Baqir refer to it as a lie?!
The answer lies in the following report:
(Rijal-al-Kashi)
‘Umar b. Riyāḥ:
“I (Umar ibn Riyah) asked Abū Ja‘far (al-Baqir) about an issue, and he answered me with a certain answer. Then I asked him about it again the following year, and he gave me an answer contrary to the first. I asked him, ‘Why did you do this?’ He said: ‘I did it out of taqiyyah.’ Yet God knows that I only asked him sincerely, fully determined to adopt whatever he gave me as a religious ruling, to accept it and act upon it. There was no reason for him to practice taqiyyah with me — this is his situation.”
Muḥammad b. Qays (a companion of Imam al-Baqir) said to him:
“Perhaps someone was present before whom he practiced taqiyyah?”
He said:
“No — in neither situation was anyone present in his gathering except me. No, rather both of his answers were given in a way that shows confusion. He did not remember what he had answered in the past year, so he gave a different answer.”
So he turned away from believing in his Imamate, saying:
“An Imam cannot give a false ruling under any circumstance, nor in any situation. An Imam does not practice taqiyyah except in matters in which it is obligatory before God. Nor does an Imam lower his veil and close his door (i.e., hide himself). It is not permissible for the Imam except to appear openly, to command the good, and to forbid the evil.”
Thus he inclined toward the doctrine of the Baṭriyya, and a small number of people followed him.
يقال له: محمد بن قيس، فقال: إني سألت أبا جعفر عليه السلام عن مسألة فأجابني فيها بجواب، ثمسألته عنها في عام آخر فأجابني فيهابخلاف الجواب الاوّل، فقلت له: لم فعل تذلك؟ فقال: فعلته للتقيّة، وقد علم اللّه أنّني ما سألته إلاّ وأنّي صحيح العزم على التديّن بما يفتينيفيه وقبوله والعمل به، ولا وجه لاتقائه إيّاى، وهذه حاله،
فقال له محمد بن قيس: فلعلّه حضرك من اتّقاه؟ فقال: ما حضر مجلسه في واحد من الحالين غيرى، لا، ولكن كان جوابه جميعاً على وجهالتخيب، ولم يحفظ ما أجاب به في العام الماضي فيجيب بمثله، فرجع عن إمامته، وقال: لا يكون إمام يفتي بالباطل على شىء من الوجوه، ولافي حال من الاحوال، ولا يكون إمام يفتي بتقيّةمن غير ما يجب عند اللّه، ولا هو مرخ ستره ويغلق بابه، ولا يسع الامام إلاّالخروج ، والامربالمعروف، والنهي عن المنكر، فمال إلى سنته بقول البترية ومالمعه نفر يسير
To simply put it through,
The idea that the Imam can issue an order in taqiyya, without imminent physical danger, is not an idea that makes sense to many people.
Nor is the idea that the Imam has the privilege to change his answers, however, he wants (regardless of taqiyya).
The mere fact that the Imam would do such a thing would make some Shi'a believe the following about the Imam:
- He issued a fatwa on a certain matter
- When asked the same question later on, the Imam forgot his previous answer
- To save face, the Imam labelled his previous fatwa as taqiyya
Hence Umar ibn Riyyah said:
“No — in neither situation was anyone present in his gathering except me. No, rather both of his answers were given in a way that shows confusion. He did not remember what he had answered in the past year, so he gave a different answer.”
So he turned away from believing in his Imamate, saying:
“An Imam cannot give a false ruling under any circumstance, nor in any situation. An Imam does not practice taqiyyah except in matters in which it is obligatory before God."
Being so -
The same level of confusion by the Shi'a happened when Imam al-Sadiq disassociated from Abu al-Khattab, after previously appointing him as his Bab:
(Rijal al-Kashi)
"A man asked Aba al-Hasan [al-Kadhim] عليه السلام and said: How did it happen that Abu Abdillah عليه السلام said about Abi al-Khattab what he said about him at first [in commissioning him] and then came the command to disassociate from him? So he said to him: Is it only for Abi Abdillah عليه السلام to appoint but not to depose!”
233] رجال الكشي: محمد بن مسعود، عن علي بن الحسن، عن معمر بن خلاد قال: قال أبو الحسن عليه السلام: إن أبا الخطاب أفسد أهلالكوفة فصاروا لا يصلون المغرب حتى يغيب الشفق و لم يكن ذلك إنما ذاك للمسافر و صاحب العلة، و قال: إن رجلا سأل أبا الحسن عليهالسلام فقال: كيف قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام في أبي الخطاب ما قال ثم جاءت البراءة منه؟ فقال له: أكان لأبي عبد الله عليه السلام أنيستعمل و ليس له أن يعزل
The average person could simply not make sense of what happened.
What, then is the obvious solution to Shi'a who do not believe the Imams have the right to change their answers at will?
Simple:
Just state that the previous answer was a lie perjured against the Imam, but the new answer is the truth.
Hence:
"As for Abū al-Khaṭṭāb, he has lied about me.
He claimed that I commanded him that neither he nor his followers should pray the Maghrib (sunset prayer) until they see a certain star called al-Qundānī"
The Khattabiya believed that Abu al-Khattab's narrations were a true representation of Imam al-Sadiq's orders.
Yet, to kill Abu al-Khattab's remembrance in the eyes of commoner Shi'a,
Imam al-Sadiq called Abu al-Khattab's ahadith "lies".
This is to avoid lay Shi'a being confused as to how Imam al-Sadiq can simply reverse his orders at will -
Such as the idea of ordering the postponing of Maghrib prayers until a star appears, then reversing Maghrib back to normative prayer time.
It is because commoners believed that determination of prayer times is a prerogative of God, only.
Yet, if the Imam asserts that Abu al-Khattab’s narrations are a lie - no Shi’i would doubt if the Imam orders praying of Maghrib at the typical times.
I hope this was beneficial
Wasalaam
John Andaluso
