University of CaliforniaLos Angeles

The development of Shaykhí thought inShí‘í Islam

A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of therequirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy

in Islamic Studies

by

Vahid Rafati

1979

The dissertation of Vahid Rafati is approved.

Ismail Poonawala

Michael G. Morony

Andras Bodrogeligeti

Amin Banani, Committee Chair

University of California, Los Angeles1979

ii

To my parents

iii

Contents

Acknowledgements........................................................................................................... . vi

Introduction......................................................................................................................... . 1

I The religious, intellectual climate of Iran during the first halfof the nineteenth century...................................................................................... 12

II Shaykh A mad A sá’í his life and worksḥ ḥ ....................................................... 36Sources on the life of Shaykh A madḥ .................................................... 36The life of Shaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ ............................................................. 39The works of Shaykh A madḥ .................................................................... 53

III The basic Shaykhí ontological doctrines........................................................ 69

IV The basic Shaykhí eschatological doctrines.................................................. 102

V Developments in the Shaykhí school after the death of ShaykhA mad A sá’íḥ ḥ ............................................................................................................ . 126

Sayyid Ká im’s worksẓ ................................................................................... 131ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání and the Shaykhís

of Kermán............................................................................................... . 138Mírzá Shafí‘ Tabrízí and the Shaykhís of Tabríz................................ 142Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad ḥ Shirází, The Báb and the Bábís................ 144

VI Shaykhí teachings that paved the way for the Báb.................................... 167

VII The relationship of Shaykhí doctrines to the religious thoughtof the Báb..................................................................................................................... . 191

Conclusion............................................................................................................................. . 213

Appendices............................................................................................................................ . 218A: Writings of Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im on theḥ ẓ

Qá’im......................................................................................................... . 218B: The abjad system................................................................................ . 220

Bibliography......................................................................................................................... . 221I. Unpublished manuscript sources................................................. 221II. Published sources............................................................................... . 221

iv

A note on transliteration and Quranic references

The transliteration system employed in this work forArabic Romanization is that of the Library of Congress.Persian personal names, words in book titles, and geographi-cal names, however, are transliterated according to thestandard Persian pronunciation. Titles of certain well-known figures are given in the form by which they areusually reproduced in English (e.g., Bahá’u’lláh).

For the noun, “Shí‘a” is used; for the adjective,“Shí‘í”.

All Quranic references are to the English translationof the Qur’án by Maulvi Muhammad Ali (London, 1917).

v

Acknowledgements

This dissertation would not have been possible withoutthe support and encouragement of my advisor, Professor AminBanani. His perceptive comments and thought-provokinginsights were of inestimable value. I will always beindebted to him. I would also like to express my deepappreciation to Dr Iraj Ayman, the distinguished Persianpsychologist, who encouraged me to continue my graduate workin the United States. This was a turning point in my lifeand gave me new insights into scholarship.

I also wish to express my deep gratitude to the membersof my committee, with whom I had the privilege of studying.I am particularly grateful to Professor Michael Morony andProfessor Ismail Poonawala, who made several fundamentalcomments.

My cordial appreciation goes to Ralph Jaeckel, who readthe entire dissertation and made numerous comments onvarious aspects of the work.

I thank my editor, Wendy Heller, for helping me turnthe original draft into its final form, and Ellen Engs, whotyped several drafts of the work with kindness andcourtesy.

I also wish to thank Nina Bertelson, Terry Joseph, andEvelyn Oder, of the Gustave von Grunebaum Center for NearEastern Studies, who helped to make my graduate study atUCLA an enjoyable experience.

Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the

vi

Iran-America Foundation which awarded me a grant in supportof this work.

vii

Vita

April 11, 1945 Born, Shiraz, Iran1969 B.A., University of Tehran, Iran1973-1974 American University of Beirut, Lebanon (intensive

English and Arabic, non-degree program)1974-1978 Research Assistant, von Grunebaum Center for Near

Eastern Studies, University of California, Los Angeles1979 Persian Instructor, UCLA Extension Program

Publications1. Fihristhá va A‘lám-i Mujalladát-i Noh

Gána-i Kutub-i Má’ida-i Ásmání, (Indexesfor the Nine Volumes of the Má’ida-iÁsmání, compiled by ‘Abd al- amíd IḤ shráqKhávarí), Tehrán, 1972, 309 p.

2. Seven articles, “Mutamimát-i Umn al-Kitáb” (The Supplements to the Kitáb-iAqdas) published in Áhang-i Badí‘,(1976–). The series is continuing.

3. “Hadaf va Ravesh dar Ta qíq-i Ma‘árif-iḥBahá’í”, (Purpose and Method in Studyingthe Bahá’í Writings), Áhang-i Badí‘, 1977.

4. “Gozáreshí bi Ikhtiṣár dár bára-i Alwáḥ-iá rat-i ‘Abdu’l-Bahá Ḥ ḍ Khitáb bi Yárán-i

Gharb” (A Short Report on ‘Abdu’l-Bahá’sLetters to American Believers). A studyof 1420 manuscript letters in Persian andArabic written by the leader of theBahá’í Faith. Áhang-i Badí‘, 1977.

viii

Abstract of the dissertation

The Development of Shaykhí Thought in Shí‘í Islam

by

Vahid RafatiDoctor of Philosophy in Islamic Studies

University of California, Los Angeles, 1979Professor Amin Banani, Chair

In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries,Shaykh A mad A sá’í (d. 1241/1825), a native of A sá,ḥ ḥ ḥfounded a new school of thought within the Imámí Shí‘a. Theheterodox doctrines of Shaykh A mad laid the foundations forḥa new approach to Shí‘í theology and caused the traditionalShí‘í theologians to denounce him as an innovator in theirpolemical works.

Shaykh A mad’s doctrines were a synthesis of the viewsḥof the Akhbárí and the U úlí schools. He emphasized theṣimportance of the imáns and prepared his students for theadvent of the Twelfth Imám or Mahdí, whose appearance hadbeen expected for centuries.

Shaykh A mad wrote extensively, traveled widely and,ḥwith his erudition and personal magnetism, won over adher-ents from different parts of the country and from differentsocial and intellectual backgrounds including many members

ix

of the royal family.

After Shaykh A mad’s death, the leadership of hisḥschool fell to Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, his close student, whocontinued Shaykh A mad’s approach and, in numerous works,ḥelaborated his thoughts. The death of Sayyid Ká im wasẓfollowed by a series of crises, aggravated by the fact thathe did not designate a successor.

The teachings, particularly the predictions, of bothShaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im prepared their followers forḥ ẓthe acceptance of the expected Mahdí. When the Báb, thefounder of the Bábí religious movement, claimed (in 1260/1244) that he was the expected one, many Shaykhís acceptedhis claim.

The Shaykhí school was the latter branch of the ImámíShí‘a, an intellectual link between Islam and the Bábímovement, and a point of departure for a series of religiousand social developments in later periods which had a greatimpact upon the intellectual life of the Persians.

x

Introduction

Throughout its history, Shí‘í Islam has witnessednumerous sectarian developments and extremes of ideologicaldiversity. One of the most important and influentialdevelopments occurred during the late eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries when Shaykh A mad A sá’í (d. 1241/1825)ḥ ḥfounded a new school of thought which, although still withinthe Shí‘í fold, became the focus of sectarian polemics.Shaykh A mad maintained that the religious leaders no longerḥtaught the truth, and that truth should be received directlyfrom divine sources. His school was the direct result ofthe religious and social struggles of the period, and it, inturn, later contributed to social and religious change.

To place the Shaykhí1 school in the context of Islamicschism, it is useful to sketch the definition of andapproach toward religious sects in general as formulated byWestern scholars on the basis of study of Christian sects,and then to provide an Islamic perspective on the subject.

The term ‘sect’ refers to a body of believers which hasbecome separated from the main body of the religious commun-ity. While one sect of a religious body differs in nature,ideology, and purpose from other sects of the same religion,sociological studies show that sects share certain commonsocial features: they originate out of protest, whetheraggressive or nonaggressive, against the parent organiza-tion’s beliefs, doctrines, or rituals; they usually consist

1

of people who belong to a lower class than the members ofthe parent church and are sometimes geographically isolated;they almost always begin functioning under a charismaticleader; and they come into being as a result of the church’sinability to meet the social and psychological needs of someof its members.

B. R. Wilson, a leading authority on sectarianism, hasdistinguished six types of sects on the basis of the sect’sresponse to the world: (1) conversionist sects, whose“reaction towards the outside world is to suggest that thelatter is corrupted because man is corrupted”;2 (2) revolu-tionary sects, whose “attitude towards the outside world issummed up in a desire to be rid of the present social orderwhen the time is ripe—if necessary, by force and violence”;3

(3) introversionist sects, “whose response to the world isneither to convert the population nor to expect the world’soverturn, but simply in retiring from it to enjoy thesecurity gained by personal holiness. This type is com-pletely indifferent to social reforms, to individualconversion and to social revolutions”;4 (4) manipulationistsects, which, “previously called gnostic, are those whichinsist especially on a particular and distinctive knowledge.They define themselves vis-à-vis the outside world essen-tially by accepting its goals”;5 (5) thaumaturgical sects,or “movements which insist that it is possible for men toexperience the extraordinary effect of the supernatural ontheir lives”;6 and (6) reformist sects, which “seem to

2

constitute a case apart. But the dynamic analytic approachto religious movements demands a category corresponding tothose groups which, though sectarian in more than onerespect, have affected transformations in their earlyresponse towards the outside world.”7

In the Western literature on Islamic schism, essentialterms such as “sect”, “theological school”, “group”, and“school of law” are used inconsistently and often inter-changeably. For example, the writers of articles in theShorter Encyclopaedia of Islam have used the various termslisted above to define or describe schisms with commonelements and similar natures. There one finds under“al-Murdji’a”, “name of one of the early sects of Islam”,8

and under “al-Mu‘tazila” one reads, “the name of the greattheological school which created the speculative dogmaticsof Islam”.9 The “Kháridjites” are called “the earliest ofthe religious sects”,10 and “al-Zaidíya” are described as“the practical groups of the Shí‘a”.11 Furthermore,“Málikís” are called “the school of law”,12 and for the“ anafites” the Arabic term “Ḥ madhhab”—without even itsequivalent in English (which could be “school”)—is used.13

In contrast to the undifferentiated approach illustra-ted above, the introduction to al-Farq Bayn al-Firaq, awell-known book by one of the most eminent Muslim heresio-graphers, Abú Man úr ‘Abd al-Qádir b. áhir al-Baṣ Ṭ ghdádí(d. 429/1037), is a good example of a Muslim scholar’sapproach toward and evaluation of sects in an Islamic

3

context.

According to al-Baghdádí, a Tradition on the authorityof the Prophet Mu ammad reads, “My people will be dividedḥinto seventy-three firqa [sections, groups] of which onlyone will be saved.”14 Al-Baghdádí categorizes the Islamicsects into seventy-three, of which the only one to be “saved”is the Sunní. He differentiates the groups into two maincategories. The first category deals with theologicalquestions such as the understanding of God, His unity,justice, and other attributes; free will versus predestina-tion: the possibility of seeing God on the Day of Judgement;and the qualities of the Prophet Mu ammad. Each sectḥmaintains its own attitude toward these questions, and eachgroup, considering itself right and justified, accuses theothers of being infidels. The second category comprisesjurisprudential questions defined by an understanding ofQuranic teachings. The jurisprudential attitudes of a sectare not considered grounds for accusing its members of beinginfidels.

To decide who belonged to the saved sect and who didnot, al-Baghdádí had to provide a definition for the term“Muslim”. He enumerates various definitions according todifferent sects, and then he states the definition which,apparently, is accepted by the saved sect, namely theSunnís.

According to the Karámíya sect, a Muslim is one whobelieves in the oneness of God and in His Prophet Mu ammad.ḥ

4

According to another sect, a Muslin is one who believes that(1) the universe is accidental ( ádiḥ th), (2) God and Hisattributes are eternal, (3) Muḥammad is the messenger ofGod for the entire human world, (4) Mu ammad’s religion willḥlast forever, (5) the Qur’án is the main source for religi-ous order, and (6) the Ka‘ba is the direction of obligatoryprayer. Al-Baghdádí then asserts, as the last condition ofbelief, that a true Muslim does not set up or adhere toheretical doctrine (bid‘a), of which he identifies twocategories. The first category of heretical doctrine causesa believer (Muslim) to become a nonbeliever. For example,the members of Bayáníya or Mughayríya sects would not beconsidered Muslims because they maintain the divinity of theimáms. Belief in incarnation, or belief in the acceptabili-ty of marriage between a man and his daughter’s daughter,which was practiced by the Maymúníya, made them cease to beMuslims, according to al-Baghdádí. Similarly, the beliefthat Islam would be abrogated on the Last Day was a hereti-cal doctrine which caused the Abá íya to become non-Muslimsḍin his view.

The second category of heretical doctrine does notcause the believer to become a nonbeliever, but it doesdeprive him of some social rights. For example, he canneither lead the group prayer nor marry a woman from amongthe saved sect, the Sunnís.

Al-Baghdádí’s approach to Islamic sects appears toimply that only heretical doctrines concerning religious

5

matters played a role in generating new sects in Islam. Tosupport his claim that social and economic factors did notplay any part, he contends that the controversial issuesraised immediately after the death of the Prophet were alsoof theological or religious nature, and that Abú Bakr, whobecame the first successor (caliph) of the Prophet, solvedthem all by quoting the Prophet’s statements ( adíḥ th); thus,none of the issues caused schism in Islam at that tine.Such controversial issues included the question of whetherthe Prophet was dead or had ascended to heaven like Jesus;whether the Prophet should be buried in Mecca, his birth-place, or in Medina, the city of Emigration where heestablished his religion; whether the Prophet’s successor(imám) could be a man from outside the Prophet’s clan(Quraysh) or had to be a member of the Quraysh. Althoughevery one of these issues had immediate socio-politicalimplications, it is significant that traditional Muslimperspective assigns merely theological value to them. Infact, two jurisprudential issues had been raised: (1) couldanyone inherit from the Prophet, or did his property belongto the community? and (2) was a non-zakát (alms) payer stilla Muslim? Even the imamate, the question of who wouldsucceed the Prophet, which split Islam, was originallyperceived as a religious issue and only later developed intoa social and political dispute.

In actuality, the “religious” problems that causedschism in Islam, like the issue of the imamate, could also

6

fall into the categories of jurisprudential, theological,and philosophical differences in the interpretation of theQur’án and adíḥ th, the validity and authenticity of adíḥ th,daily worship practices, and theological discussions aboutGod, the prophets, the angels, and man’s predestination orfree will.

The applicability of the terms “sect”, “movement”,“school”, and so on, to these doctrines depends upon thedefinition of these terms within the framework of Islamichistory, the social function of the group, its sense ofgroup solidarity, and the relationship of the schismaticgroup to the parent group. It must be borne in mind,however, that it is nearly impossible to draw a line between“sects” and “schools” in Islam, or to affix a certain termto a certain group and expect the tern to be applicable inall the historical phases of that group.

The Shaykhí school has been referred to in Persianworks as “firqa” (division, section) or “madhhab” (school,religious creed), but more often as “Shaykhíya”, a termconsisting of “Shaykh” and the sufix “íya” which denoteseither a group of people who follow a certain person, forexample, “Zaydíya”, or a group with a certain ideologicalsystem, such as “Qadaríya”.

In this work the term “Shaykhí school” is used, beingthe preferred term of the Shaykhís themselves and appropri-ate to a theological study of the Shaykhí ideology, which isintended as a primary attempt at clarification of the

7

intellectual parameters of the Shaykhí school, as well asexamining the issue in its wider historical context.

The Shaykhí school, although primarily a theologicalschool, had definite practical and sociological implications,promoted group cohesion, strengthened the moral order, andoffered new approaches toward dogmatic, traditional prin-ciples of Shí‘í thought. Although the school’s theoreticalapproaches were a revolution in the Shí‘a, they were strong-ly rooted in Shí‘í Traditions and the utterances of theShí‘í imáms. The school reevaluated Shí‘í dogmas, redefinedthe religious norms, reconsidered the traditional under-standing of Shí‘í beliefs, and introduced a series of newdoctrines, not in the name of a new independent value-oriented movement or religious revolution, but as a systemwhich claimed to be the very essence of Shí‘í thought. ManyShí‘í authorities did not accept this claim, however, andconsidered the Shaykhí school to be heresy.

The doctrines of the Shaykhí school were a syncretismof indigenous religious Shí‘í beliefs, and were not importedfrom foreign cultural or religious ideologies. Of thetheological, sociological, and ritual aspects that character-ize the school, this study is concerned mainly with thetheological aspects, for it is the theological doctrines ofthe school that form its strongest connection to themainstream of Shí‘í thought, and also constitute the mostsignificant links between the school and the Bábí religiousmovement. In studying the theology of the school, only the

8

basic ideas of Shaykhí ontology and eschatology will bediscussed. A detailed discussion of the sources whichinfluenced the Shaykhí school, and of nature of the similar-ities between the ideology of the Shaykhí school and othertheological and philosophical trends of thought, is beyondthe scope of this work.

In spite of the fact that numerous significant socialand political events took place during this era, fewscholarly works about the period have been written. Thereligious and intellectual climate has received even lessscholarly attention. The abundance of historical sources,15

travelers’ narratives, biographical works, politicaldocuments, and religious treatises produced in this erarequires careful study and presents a challenge to thescholar.

This study employs an analytical approach based onprimary sources written by Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká imḥ ẓRashtí, his successor. In discussing points of controversybetween the Shaykhí school and other trends of thought,reference is made to scholarly works by specialists in thefield.

Shaykh A mad’s contribution in reconciling conflictingẓbeliefs unified a group of people from different socialbackgrounds and geographical regions and prepared themintellectually to accept the Báb, who in the middle of thenineteenth century claimed to be the fulfillment of theIslamic expectation of the Mahdí and ultimately proclaimed

9

that his was a religious system independent of Islam, with anew revealed Holy Book.

While the Shaykhí school was not a value-oriented,religious revolutionary, messianic, and charismatic movement,it contained the seeds of all these features, which werelater to germinate and develop to fruition in the Bábímovement, a movement which proved to be broader in scope andmore comprehensive in ideology than the Shaykhí school whichhad preceded it.

10

11

IThe religious, intellectual climate of Iran during

the first half of the nineteenth century

The Qájár period (1193/1779–1342/1924) was character-ized by the transformation of long-established institutionsand the emergence of new approaches to social and religiouslife in Iran. It was a period of despair, of decline inintellectual creativity, and of spiritual and materialdeprivation. It was a period of European imperialisticdesigns, during which Eastern and Western cultures met andclashed. The transformation of institutions gave rise toseveral major political and religious reforms which, indepth, scope, and creativity, differed from many otherreforms in Persian history.

Shí‘í Islam, as the fundamental element in the life,manners, and attitudes of the Persians, has had a greatinfluence upon the mentality, character, and attitudes ofthe Persians in their social and private life. Islam hasalso played a peculiar and influential role in all aspectsof the intellectual and moral climate of the nation.Therefore, no study of the socio-political history of thePersians could be attempted without a close consideration ofreligious attitudes.

A comprehensive study of the religious climate of theperiod is still to be undertaken. In such a study, theactivities of the religious circles, the life and the

12

contributions of the individual ‘ulamá, and relations amongthe ‘ulamá themselves and with the people, rulers, andreligious minorities are important elements which must beconsidered in order to comprehend the roots of the religiousreforms.

The intent of the present chapter is to sketch thebasic facts in the religious life of the Persians in orderto provide a foundation for the discussion of the mainShaykhí doctrines.

Shí‘í Islam has been a factor in the religious life ofIran from the early period of the Islamic era. From the

afavíd period (907/1501–1145/1732), to the present, exceptṢfor a short time during the Afshár Dynasty (1148/1736–1210/1795), Shí‘a has been the official religious system of Iran.The strong intellectual connection of the Persian Shí‘a withthe Shí‘í centers of ‘Atabát16 must be emphasized. The holyshrines of the Shí‘í imáns and the Shí‘í circles of ‘Atabáthave always attracted the Persian Shí‘a and have been themost respected places for Shí‘í studies in the Islamicworld. Although Iran has several well-known centers forthese studies, such as Mashhad, Qom, I fahán, and Tehránṣ , itis generally believed that the best schools and the mostqualified teachers for advanced studies in Shí‘í doctrinesare located in ‘Atabát. Attendance at the lectures of theShí‘í ‘ulamá in ‘Atabát and study in their circles is theutmost desire of the Shí‘í knowledge seeker.

The curriculum of the circles consists of the study of

13

the Qur’án, Shí‘í tafsír (interpretation), adíḥ th (Tradition),fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), and Arabic grammar. Thestudents begin their career by memorizing the Qur’án and bystudying the Arabic language through memorization of theNi áb al- ibyánṣ Ṣ of Badr al-Dín Ma múd b. Abí Bakr Faráhíḥ(d. 1208/1793). Alongside the Ni ábṣ , or a little later intheir studies, the Amthila and arf MírṢ of Mír Sayyid SharífJurjání (816/1413) are studied as basic texts for Arabicgrammar. In the literary sciences (e.g., Ma‘ání, Bayár, andBadí‘), the Mu awwalṭ of Mas‘úd b. ‘Umar Sa‘d Taftázání(d. 793/1390) is the basic text. In principles of juris-prudence the Ma‘álim al-U úlṣ of Shaykh asan b. Zayn al-DínḤal-Shahíd al-Thání, or the Qawánín al-Mu kama fi al-U úl ḥ ṣ ofMírzá Abú al-Qásim b. Mu ammad asan, known as Mírzá-i Qomíḥ Ḥ(d. 1231/1815), is taught. Although the basic coursesoffered in each circle are almost identical, the materialcovered in each course and the duration of the coursedepends on the interest of the teacher.17

Fields of specialization do not exist, and each learnedman can teach whatever he wishes. The teachers of higherrank are expected to answer any questions and discuss anyreligious issue. In spite of the lack of specialization inreligious studies, some of the ‘ulamá are better known fortheir knowledge and authority in certain fields. The mostrespected teachers are those who can teach different coursesto many students.

The term of study in ‘Atabát is not fixed. Students

14

may stay in ‘Atabát anywhere from a few months to five, oreven seven, years. They usually complete a course bywriting a treatise on a religious subject. If the treatiseis approved by the teacher, the writer is awarded an ijáza(authorization, license).18 An ijáza is a great honor for astudent and the official recognition of his academic, moral,and religious qualifications. The fame and the esteem ofthe issuer of an ijáza is significant for the later relig-ious and academic life of the receiver: biographical booksalways provide the names of the ‘ulamá from whom the ‘álimhas received his ijázas.19

In spite of the fact that the religious circles of‘Atabát and Iran provided religious education for hundredsof Shí‘a, the general public, which was illiterate, lackedany formal religious education, and the general knowledge ofthe Shí‘í community rarely went beyond the details of dailyrituals. In such a society, the religious understanding ofthe individuals is based on obedience to religious leaders.The fact that in Persian society only a certain group ofpeople receive a religious education is partly due to thefact that a person traditionally follows the occupation ofhis father, and, as a result, several members of one familyoften receive a good education, and even reach the highestranks of religious leadership.20

During this period, a great number of books andtreatises were written in various fields of Islamicsciences.21 It is reported, for example, that Mullá Mu ammadḥ

15

Ja‘far Astarábádí (d. 1263/1846) wrote 70 books,22 and SayyidKá im Raẓ shtí (d. 1259/1843) wrote 150.23 Although, on thebasis of these reports, the number of religious works of theperiod approaches several thousand volumes, the majority ofthem are in the nature of marginal notes to the well-knownworks of the earlier Shí‘í writers. Rather than encouragingoriginality and creativity, Shí‘í scholarship has pursuedvarious forms of taqríẓ (eulogy), taḥshíya (insertion), andtalkhíṣ (abridgment) on the important works of the past.24

For example, among the works written by Astarábádí, fourteenare in the form of taḥshíya and sharḥ (exegesis).25

Very rarely did an ‘álím concentrate his works in onefield. Fame and popularity among the ‘ulamá also dependedon their versatility. The result was a multitude of authorswho contributed very little to the critical study of Shí‘íscholarship.

The language of the scholarly texts in Islam has alwaysbeen Arabic. Although during this period the tendencytoward writing religious texts in Persian was beginning toincrease among some of the ‘ulamá, the main works of all thedistinguished ‘ulamá were still being written in Arabic.

An examination of the religious works of the periodreveals that aside from a few influential and well-respectedworks on fiqh, such as Shaykh Murta á An árí’s (d. 1281/1864)ḍ ṣworks, greatest attention was given primarily to the minorquestions of fiqh, while much less attention was given otherreligious fields. This is understandable, for each mujtahid

16

tried to consolidate his authority as the “marja‘-i taqlíd”by providing an immediate and personal framework of legalsanctions relating to a plethora of daily dilemmas in thelives of his followers. Works on fiqh were so common thatit is hard to find an ‘álim who did not write a few works onthis subject. It is not surprising, then, that only a smallnumber of them have been accepted and widely used by theentire Shí‘í community.

In the field of tafsír nothing was written that iscomparable, either in length or in quality, to the earlierShí‘í tafsírs, such as the Majma‘ al-Bayán by abrisíṬ(d. 548/1153).26 The well-known books of tafsír written inthis period are commentaries on a few verses or chapters ofthe Qur’án. A full, comprehensive commentary was notattempted.27

The ‘ulamá, collectively known in Persian society asthe Jámi‘a-i Rú áníyatḥ (the spiritual concourse), were incharge of religious rituals.28 The members of this group,although differing from one another in rank, all functionedas commentators on the Qur’án and Islamic law, religiousleaders, judges, teachers, arbitrators, managers of the holyshrines, and recipients of the income of the religiousendowments (auqáf). They were also entitled to receive thekhums29 on behalf of the imáms.

The ‘ulamá were in charge of various socio-religiousaffairs of the community. They were trusted by the people as representatives of the holy imáms among the Shí‘a. They

17

were also considered the true leaders, decision makers,reliable sources, and leading authorities in religiousdoctrine, and were thought to be the arbiters of the commongood of the community. Such an attitude gave the ‘ulamápower and influence and enabled them to assume leading rolesin social conflicts. The ‘ulamá were also a refuge forpeople who were treated unjustly. In this respect they werethe main link between the ruling class and the masses.

The involvement of the ‘ulamá in various socio-religious affairs produced a noticeable competition amongthem for students, attendance at daily prayers, and incomefrom auqáf. In most cases, it was accompanied by ideologic-al disputes. The most common device used against one’srivals was takfír (accusing someone of being an infidel),which could cause the accused person to lose his followingand even be put to death by the followers of the issuer ofthe takfír. Takfír was always pronounced in the name ofdefending and protecting Islamic interests.

The relationship between the ‘ulamá and the rulingclass was not fixed and determined. It varied on anindividual as well as temporal basis. As the nature of therelationship was affected by many factors, any generaliza-tion on this subject must be made with care. Since religionwas the most influential factor in the private and sociallife of the Islamic community, naturally the ‘ulamá werethe most respected and influential group. They ascribed tothemselves the roles of interpreters of the Word of God and

18

protectors of Islam on earth. As a result of such functions,the rulers of Islamic societies needed the support of the‘ulamá to consolidate their political positions. They wouldobtain wider support and popularity if they could establishfriendly relations with the ‘ulamá. Politically or militar-ily weak rulers particularly required their support. It isgenerally true that, as the power and stability of a rulerincreased, his appeal for ‘ulamá’s support decreased, but itmust immediately be added that the personal tendencies ofthe ruler played a fundamental role in defining his rela-tions with the ‘ulamá. A ruler with a religious interestwas more attached to the ‘ulamá than a ruler lacking such aninterest. From the standpoint of the ‘ulamá, the personaltendencies of the ‘álim were significant in defining hisrelations with the rulers. While some of the ‘ulamá were sodetached from material involvement that they paid no heed tothe rulers, others were active in political affairs. Thisgroup, which did not object to being paid by the court,carried out its commands and tended to forget their roles asspiritual leaders. It is true, however, that an ‘álim wasbetter able to fulfill his function if he had a satisfactoryrelationship with the rulers. Mutual support was, therefore,of benefit to both sides.

Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh (d. 1250/1834), who was a man with astrong religious sense,30 respected, financially supported,and paid visits to the ‘ulamá. The Sháh invited MulláJa‘far of Astarábád (d. 1263/1846) to Tehrán and housed him

19

near the royal palace, visiting him at least once a month.31

It is also reported that Fat (‘Alí ḥ Sháh visited Mullá ‘AbdAlláh Zonozí (d. 1257/1841) and presented gifts to him andto his students.32 Mullá ‘Abd al-Razzaq Donbolí (d. 1242/1820) states that Náyib al-Sal ana ‘Abbás Mírzá (d. 1249/ṭ1833) and Qá’im Maqám (d. 1251/1835) expressed the utmostrespect for the ‘ulamá. Náyib al-Sal ana was said to attendṭthe congregational prayer every Friday, and Qá’im Maqámwould host a reception for the ‘ulamá every Thursday andFriday.33 It is also reported that Mu ammad ‘Alí Mírzáḥ(d. 1237/1821), son of Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh and the governor ofKermánsháh, invited Shaykh A mad A sá’í (d. 1241/1825) toḥ ḥKermánsháh and paid him one thousand tománs34 for his travelexpenses. Shaykh A mad was also paid a monthly salary ofḥseven hundred tománs.35

In spite of such generosity and kindness, rulers didnot tolerate any serious opposition from the ‘ulamá:whenever the ‘ulamá threatened the security of a ruler, hewould act against them.36

Doctrinal conflict and crisis was at a high level duringthis period and affected the entire life and attitude of thePersian Shí‘a. In the year 260/873 when, according to theShí‘í belief, the Twelfth Imám disappeared in Sámarrá andhis occultation (ghaybat) began, the Shí‘a were cut off fromhis direct religious and spiritual guidance. Prior to thattime, religious problems had been solved by asking hisadvice or by emulating his conduct, deeds, and words.

20

Therefore, the Traditions were consulted as the main sourcesfor Islamic law. This situation continued until the end ofthe Lesser Occultation (which began in 260/873 and ended in324/940).37 By the beginning of the Greater Occultation(329/940), the Shí‘a could only refer to the Qur’án and theTraditions on the authority of the Prophet and the imáms,since all material connection with the imáms had beensevered in 329/940. In the early decades of the occultationperiod, the most important collections of Traditions, whichare considered to be second in validity only to the Qur’án,were compiled by Kolayní (d. 329/940), adúq (Ibn Bábawayh)Ṣ(d. 381/991), and osí (460/1067).Ṭ

The occultation of the imám raised a fundamentalquestion: who would be the center of authority and whatwould be the sources of legislation? Some Shí‘í scholarsbelieved it was permissible to employ “reason” to solveproblems for which the Qur’án and the Traditions offered noclear solutions. Other Shí‘í scholars considered the Qur’ánand the Traditions to be sufficient sources for legislationand maintained that there was no need to use individualreasoning for new religious cases. In the early period, thedispute between the two groups, although important, did notcreate a serious rift in the Shí‘í community, but in thelate fifteenth century, when confessional affiliationassumed major importance in the tribal struggles for powerin northwestern Iran, the gap widened until two separategroups, the Akhbárís and the U úlís, emerged.ṣ

21

The Akhbárís identify as the earliest Akhbárí scholarsKolayní and adúq, who collected and classified theṢTraditions. The next great Shí‘í scholar was Mu ammad b.ḥ‘Alí known as Ibn Abí Jumhúr of A sá (d. about 901/1495),ḥ 38

who appeared a full five centuries later. Akhbárí theology,with a distinct ideological system, begins with MulláMu ammad Amín Astarábádí (d. 1025 or 1031 or 1036/1617, 1621ḥor 1626).

Mullá Mu ammad Amín b. Mu ammad ḥ ḥ Sharíf Astarábádí wasborn in Astarábád and resided in Mecca and Medina. He wasthe first ‘álim to challenge the authenticity of themujtahids’ (U úlísṣ ’) judgments,39 and in many books,including the Fawá’id al-Madaníya, accused the mujtahids ofbeing the cause of corruption in Islam.40 Although thefounding of the Akhbárí school by Astarábádí marks thedivision of the Shí‘í ‘ulamá into two antagonistic groups,it was not until the eighteenth century that the U úlíṣideology was identified with a particular founder.

After Mu ammad Amín Astarábádí, the Aḥ khbárí schoolincluded a number of scholars such as Mullá Mu sin Fayḥ ḍKáshání (d. 1091/1680), who wrote the Safínat al-Naját andcriticized the U úlís. Fay states in the ṣ ḍ Safínat al-Najátthat religious legislation can be based only on the Qur’ánand the Traditions, not on the other sources used by theU úlís.ṣ 41 After Fay , the doctrines of the Aḍ khbárí schoolwere developed by ‘ulamá such as Mullá Mu ammad áhir of Qomḥ Ṭ(d. 1098/1686), Mullá Khalíl b. Ghází of Qazvín (d. 1098/

22

1686),42 and Shaykh Mu ammad b. asan urr ‘Ámilí (d. 1033/ḥ Ḥ Ḥ1623). Among these, Shaykh ‘Ámilí is the most importantbecause of his work, Wasá’il al-Shí‘a. He also wrote theFawá’id al-Tosíya, a book on Akhbárí ideology which attackedthe approach of the U úlís. In addition to the above works,ṣ‘Ámilí wrote the Hadíyat al-Abrár, devoted to the disputesbetween the Akhbárís and the Usúlís. He also wrote theHidáyat al-Umma ilá A kám al-A’immaḥ . As a major voice of“learned orthodoxy”, he was opposed to the “ecstaticheterodoxy” of the úfís.Ṣ 43

The views of Astarábádí, which were supported andenriched by the later Akhbárí ‘ulamá, were accepted by themajority of the Shí‘a in Iran, Iraq, and the Gulf provinces.Shaykh ‘Alí b. Sulaymán Ba rayní (d. 1062/1651) establishedḥthe Akhbárí school in Ba raynḥ 44 and was followed by ShaykhSulaymán b. ‘Abd Alláh Máhúzí (d. 1121/1709) and hisstudents. The intellectual activities of the Akhbárís inBa rayn made the province a major Aḥ khbárí center. The mostdistinguished Akhbárí scholar of Ba rayn was ḥ Shaykh ‘AbdAlláh b. áli Samáhíjí (d. 1135/1722), who severelyṢ ḥattacked U úlí beliefs and went to extremes in his enmityṣtoward the U úlís. Samáhíjí has described the views of theṣAkhbárís and the U úlís in two of his works. The first, theṣMunyat al-Mumárisín fí Ajwabat Su’álát al-Shaykh Yásín(Yásín b. áli al-Dín), was cited by the famous biographerṢ ḥMírzá Mu ammad Báqir ḥ Khánsárí (d. 1313/1895) to describe theideological differences between the two groups. The second,

23

al-Nú íyaḥ , clearly states that the Shí‘a are not obliged toobey the mujtahids because such an obligation is notestablished by God, the Prophet, or the imáms.45

The later Akhbárí scholar, Shaykh Yúsuf b. A madḥBa rayní (d. 1186/1772), well-known for his books, theḥ

adá’iq al-Ná iraḤ ḍ and the Lu’lu’at al-Ba raynḥ , was amoderate. He criticized the extremist Akhbárís in his work,al-Durr al-Najafíya fí Radd al-Akhbáríya.46 It was duringthe lifetime of this man that the founder of the U úlíṣschool, Mu ammad Báqir b. Mu ammad Akmal al-Dín of Behbahánḥ ḥ(d. 1205/1790), known as Wa íd Behbahání, rose against theḥAkhbárís, and Shaykh Yúsuf Ba rayní gave way to the newḥU úlí ideology.ṣ

Mu ammad b. ‘Abd al-Nabí Aḥ khbárí (d. 1232/1816), betterknown as Mu addiḥ th Nísháborí, was the last distinguishedAkhbárí scholar. He wrote the Qal‘ al-Asás fí Naq Asás al-ḍU úlṣ 47 and the Ma ádir al-Anwár fi al-Ijtihád wa al-Aṣ khbárto criticize the U úlí ṣ mujtahids. Mu addiḥ th Nísháborí waskilled by the U úlís in 1232/1816 in Ka imayn at the age ofṣ ẓ54.48

The persecution of Mu addiḥ th Nísháborí and the rise ofMu ammad Báqir Behbahání put an end to the Aḥ khbárí school;Akhbárí ideology, which had for centuries dominated thereligious and intellectual life of the Shí‘a in the mainShí‘í scholastic centers, was replaced by the U úlíṣideology.

Although the historical roots of U úlí thought go backṣ

24

to the occultation period, and since then there have beennumerous U úlí ṣ ‘ulamá among the Shí‘a, Mu ammad BáqirḥBehbahání is considered to be the founder of the U úlíṣschool.49 The new jurisprudential system he formulated wassubsequently adopted by the Shí‘a, and with some modifica-tions was accepted by well-known scholars such as ShaykhMurta á An árí and Mullá Mu ammad Ká im (d. 1329/1911),ḍ ṣ ḥ ẓknown as Ákhond Khorásání.

Because of his contribution to the formulation ofU úlí thought, Behbaháni became known among the ṣ Shí‘a asMu’assis Behbahání (Founder), Murawwij Behbahání (Dissemina-tor), Ostád-i Akbar (Great Teacher), and Ostád-i Kull (TheTeacher of Everyone). He wrote a number of books, mostly inPersian, among which the Risála dar Ijtihád va Akhbár issignificant for its repudiation of Akhbárí views and for itssupport of the position of the mujtahid and his functions,namely, ijtihád (individual judgment).50 He also wrote twoother works on the same subject: In i ár-i Mardom biḥ ṣMujtahid va Muqallid,51 on the theme that people are eitherlegists or imitators, and the Fawá’id al-U úlíyaṣ , arefutation of the Fawá’id al-Madaníya of Mu ammad Amín b.ḥMu ammad ḥ Sharíf Astarábádí.

Behbahání’s views on the legislative authority of the‘ulamá won universal acceptance in Shí‘í circles through thework and efforts of some distinguished students of theBehbahání circle who wrote, preached, and popularized theviewpoints of the U úlís. One of these was ṣ Shaykh Ja‘far

25

Najafí (d. 1227/1812), the author of the well-known work,Kashf al-Ghi áṭ . The beginning of this book is devoted to adescription of the U úlí approach to legislative problems.ṣNajafí also wrote two other works on the same subject: thefirst, al- aqq al-Mubín fi al-Radd ‘ala al-AḤ khbárítyín,52 todiscuss the views of two parties and to reject the extremistAkhbárís, and the second, another Kashf al-Ghi áṭ , to refutethe views of Mu addiḥ th Nísháborí. Najafí sent a copy of thisbook to Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh to prove to him the falsity of thebeliefs of the Akhbárís and of their leading authority,Mu addith Níḥ sháborí.53

Behbahání’s views were elaborated in the works of thelater U úlís, and the repudiation of the Aṣ khbárís continuedin the works of other U úlí ṣ ‘ulamá such as Mu ammadḥ

abá abá’í (d. 1242/1826).Ṭ ṭ 54 The dispute between theAkhbárís and the U úlís did not remain on an intellectualṣlevel. It became so intense that the U úlís killedṣMu addiḥ th Nísháborí for his Akhbárí views and fed his bodyto the dogs.55

The polemical works56 of the U úlís and their violentṣmeasures against the Akhbárís caused the Akhbárís to lose theirleadership of the Shí‘í community. The transfer ofreligious leadership from the Akhbárís to the U úlís was aṣturning point in the history of Shí‘í doctrine. It gavethe ‘ulamá an active role in the political and socialdevelopment of the nation. The leadership of the U úlíṣ‘ulamá, such as that of Mír Sayyid Mu ammad abá abá’í,ḥ Ṭ ṭ

26

known as Mujáhid,57 against the Russians (in 1241/1825)during the reign of Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh, is a clear example ofthe part the U úlís played in shaping the destiny of theṣPersian nation.58

The crucial doctrine of the Akhbárís and the U úlísṣrests on the question of the authority of the religiousleader.59 The U úlís believe that a ṣ Shí‘a can reach theposition of ijtihád through his personal study of Islamicsciences. A man who is well educated and known for hispiety, nobility, and moral standing may become a mujtahid.Whoever reaches these required qualifications60 is able tointerpret Islamic law and legislate regulations which do notalready exist in the Qur’án and the Traditions. In addition,the U úlís believe that a ṣ mujtahid is the representative ofthe imám among the Shí‘a and that obedience to the mujtahidis obligatory in the Shí‘í community. Therefore, thepersonal understanding and judgment of a mujtahid, which isbased on the Qur’án and the Traditions, must be accepted andfollowed by the Shí‘a who are the imitators (muqallid) ofthe mujtahid. Thus, the U úlís believe that the “gate”ṣ(báb) of ijtihád is open for the Shí‘a.

For the Akhbárís, on the other hand, the personalunderstanding of the mujtahid is not acceptable. While theAkhbárís hold that only the text of the Qur’án and theTraditions are legitimate sources for legislation, theU úlís maintain that the principles (ṣ u úlṣ ) from whichsolutions to religious problems can be derived are four:

27

(1) the Kitáb (Qur’án), (2) the sunna (the deeds, conduct,and sayings of the Prophet and the imáms, i.e., Traditions),(3) ijmá‘ (consensus of the authorities in a legal questionthe precedent for which does not exist in the first andsecond sources), and (4) ‘aql (reason).

Since the Traditions are substantially significant forthe Akhbárís, they give full validity to all of theTraditions collected in the Four Books of the Shí‘íTraditions, namely, Káfí, Tahdhíb, Istib árṣ , and Man láYa uruhu al-Faqíhḥḍ . For the U úlís, on the contrary, theṣcontents of the Four Books do not have the same validity.The U úlís allow action on the basis of “opinion”ṣ( annẓ ) when they cannot reach “knowledge” (‘ilm), whereasthe Akhbárís do not trust opinion. They contend thatknowledge is always attainable from the Traditions and istrustworthy.

U úlí doctrine maintains that there are two groups inṣShí‘í society: (1) mujtahids (legalists formulatingindependent decisions in legal or theological matters, basedon the interpretation and application of the four u úlṣ ), and(2) muqallids (imitators, who imitate the mujtahids as theirreligious guides). The Akhbárís believe that the Shí‘a mustonly imitate the infallible figures, that is, the imáms, andnot the mujtahids, who are not infallible.

Concerning ijtihád, the U úlis assert that it isṣpossible for anyone to reach the position of ijtihád throughhis personal endeavors during the occultation period (which

28

lasts until the appearance of the Mahdí), and whenever hehas reached that position he is qualified to legislatereligious regulations. The Akhbárís, on the other hand,believe that perfect religious knowledge cannot be obtainedduring the period of occultation because knowledge must beobtained from infallible sources, i.e., the imáms: thusknowledge is obtainable only from the Traditions. Therefore,they deny that the mujtahids possess perfect knowledge andunderstanding on religious questions.

The ‘Ilm al-U úlṣ 61 is a significant field of study forthe U úlís and a ṣ mujtahid must be a master in this field.The Akhbárís disregard the ‘Ilm aI-U úlṣ and believe thatsound knowledge of the terminologies employed in theTraditions is sufficient to understand the law.

Another fundamental point of dispute between the twoschools deals with the imitation of a deceased mujtahid.While the U úlís do not regard it lawful to imitate aṣdeceased mujtahid, the Akhbárís do.

Regarding the use of the Qur’án and the Traditions, theU úlís prefer to use the esoteric meaning of these works,ṣwhereas the Akhbárís are inclined to use the interpretationsof the Qur’án and the Traditions offered by the imáms, ifthey are available. In regard to the “chain of Traditions”,while the U úlís do not allow reference to Traditionsṣrelated by an authority who is not infallible, the Akhbárísrecognize as authentic Traditions related by ordinary people.

A comparison of the two schools shows that the U úlíṣ

29

school believes in the individual authority of the mujtahids.The school also admits the freedom of personal understandingand, as a result, keeps the “gate” of ijtihád open. Theflexibility of the U úlí approach toward law may have beenṣthe major reason for its appeal to the majority of the Shí‘a.This flexibility and the individualistic nature of theU úlís may also have aided the ṣ Shí‘í law to be moreadaptable to the new needs of the society.

While the social and geographical background of theleading Akhbárí authorities show that they were mainly theresidents of Mecca, Medina, and the Arabic provinces of theGulf area, the U úlís were mainly Iranian, either residentsṣof Iran or ‘Atabát. In addition, because Muḥammad BáqirBehbahání, the founder of the U úlí school, wrote mostly inṣPersian, and also because the U úlí ṣ ‘ulamá participated innationalistic movements during the Qájár period, the U úlísṣmay be considered as forerunners of the nationalisticmovement which, in its early days, appeared in religiousform. As such, the U úlís may perhaps be regarded as theṣPersian element against the Arabs, or at least against theArabic element, which predominated in the intellectual andsocial background of the Akhbárí leaders. The Persiannature of the U úlí school was probably a reason for itsṣpopularity among the Iranians. From the intellectual pointof view, it is evident that the rise of the U úlís repre-ṣsents the return of “rationalism” to the religious attitudeof the Persians after being dominated by the fundamentalist

30

approach of the Akhbárís.

31

32

33

IIShaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ

his life and works

Sources on the life of Shaykh A madḥInformation on the life and achievements of Shaykh

Aḥmad Aḥsá’í, the founder of the Shaykhí school, is to befound in the main biographical works written on the life ofthe eminent figures of Iran in the Qájár period.62 Inaddition to the biographical works, general histories ofQájár Persia as well as encyclopedias on Iran and Islam63

contain information about the Shaykh and his movement.

The oldest and most authentic source on the life ofShaykh A mad is a short treatise written by ḥ Shaykh A madḥhimself at the request of his son, Shaykh Mu ammad Taqí.ḥThis work provides brief information about the childhood andeducation of Shaykh A mad and some facts about the socialḥand religious climate of his society. The work waspublished in the Fihrist64 and also separately by usayn ‘AlíḤMa fú .ḥ ẓ 65 In addition to this autobiography, Shaykh ‘AbdAlláh, another son of Shaykh A mad, wrote a treatise inḥArabic on the life of his father. This work was translatedinto Persian and published by Mu ammad áhir ḥ Ṭ Khán.66 Anotherprimary source on the life and achievements of Shaykh A madḥwas Dalíl al-Mutaḥayyirín67 written in 1258/1842 by SayyidKá im Raẓ shtí (d. 1259/1843), the successor of Shaykh A mad.ḥ

34

This work contains biographical information about the lifeof Shaykh A mad and the author himself. The author hasḥincluded excerpts of the ijázas of Shaykh A mad and a listḥof his works. According to the Fihrist,68 the work wastranslated into Persian by Muḥammad Ra í b. Mu ammad Ri á, aḍ ḥ ḍfollower of Sayyid Ká im. Another primary source on theẓlife of Shaykh A mad, the ḥ Hidáyat al- álibínṬ ,69 was writtenin 1261/1845 by ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání (d. 1288/1871), the second leader of the Shaykhís. This book,basically a response to the ideological opponents of ShaykhAḥmad, includes a description of the Shaykh’s personalityand some of his doctrines.

In addition to the above-mentioned works, a few Persianand European scholars have written about Shaykh A mad andḥthe Shaykhí school. Among the Persian authors, Murta áḍMudarrisí-i Chahárdehí is the leading author on the Shaykhítopics. In addition to a book entitled Shaykhígarí,Bábíqarí az Na ar-i Falsafa, Táríẓ kh va Ijtimá‘70 on the life,personality, and principle doctrines of Shaykh A mad and theḥhistorical development of the movement, Mudarrisí has alsopublished a series of articles on the subject in variousPersian publications.71

Sayyid Mu ammad ‘Alí Jamál Zádeh published a series ofḥhistorical articles on the lives of the first five leadersof the Shaykhí movement, i.e., Shaykh A mad A sá’í, Sayyidḥ ḥKá im Raẓ shtí, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, ájjḤMu ammad ḥ Khán Kermání (d. 1324/1908), and ájj Zayn al-Ḥ

35

‘Ábidín Kermání (d. 1360/1941).72

Among the European scholars who became interested inthe Shaykhí school, Louis Alphonse Daniel Nicolas andJoseph Arthur Comte de Gobineau (d. 1882) are important.Nicolas’ work, Essai Sur Le Chékhisme,73 deals with thelife of Shaykh A mad and his successor, Sayyid Kim Raḥ shtí,and the main doctrines of the Shaykh. Comte de Gobineau,although he did not devote any specific work to the Shaykhís,discussed some of their basic doctrines in the secondchapter of his Les Religions et les Philosophies dans L’AsieCentrale.74

Edward Granville Browne (d. 1926) came across theShaykhís and their beliefs in the process of studying andwriting about the Báb.75 In the introduction to A Travel-ler’s Narrative,76 he gives a short account of the life ofShaykh A mad, mentions his major works and doctrines, andḥvery briefly discusses the development of the school afterhis death.

Henry Corbin, the contemporary scholar of Shí‘ítheology, has written L’École Shaykhie en ThéologíeShi‘ite.77 This book provides a sketch of the life ofShaykh A mad and the succeeding ḥ Shaykhí leaders up to Abúal-Qásim Ibráhímí (d. 1389/1969). It also contains a briefdiscussion of Shaykhí doctrines.

In spite of the studies which have already been made byscholars of the East and the West on the Shaykhí movement,the subject has yet to be critically studied. Such a

36

comprehensive study must be done on the basis of the socio-religious life and beliefs of the Persians during the Qájárperiod. The magnitude of Shaykh A mad’s achievements andḥhis intellectual contributions are so vast, and hisinfluence upon subsequent religious and social movements isso profound, that any mature judgment about him and hisschool must be made with utmost care and sound understandingof the period.

The life of Shaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥShaykh A mad b. Zayn al-Dín b. Ibráhím b. aqr b.ḥ Ṣ

Ibráhím b. Dághir, known as Shaykh A mad A sá’í, was born inḥ ḥRajab 1166/175278 in the village of Mu ayrafí in the regionṭof A sá,ḥ 79 a hinterland of Ba rayn. The clan of ḥ ShaykhA mad belonged to the bedouin tribe of al-Ma áḥ ḥ shír, whichhad settled in A sá during the lifetime of Dáḥ ghir (fivegenerations before Shaykh A mad, around the middle of theḥseventeenth century). The tribe was Sunní, but Dághir andhis clan, under unknown circumstances, became Shí‘a.Although Shaykh A mad was raised in a ḥ Shí‘í family, it isreported that the majority of his countrymen were Sunní andthat there were also úfí orders.Ṣ 80 Thus, from childhoodShaykh A mad was familiar with different trends of thoughtḥin Islam, a familiarity that played an important role in hislater career. In his autobiography, Shaykh A mad complainsḥthat his people know nothing about their religious obliga-

37

tions and duties. They can hardly differentiate betweenforbidden ( arámḥ ) and lawful ( alálḥ ).81 This irreligiositymay have led Shaykh A mad to call for a revitalization ofḥreligious life in his society.

Information about the childhood and early education ofShaykh A mad is limited to his own statements and those ofḥShaykh ‘Abd Alláh, his son. Both sources indicate that hepossessed a prodigious memory reaching back into his earlychildhood. He is reported to have recalled a heavy rain inhis home town when he was only two years of age.82

The early formal education of Shaykh A mad, like thatḥof most educated Muslims, began with reading the Qur’án,which he could do at the age of five years.83 He thenstudied the Ajurrúmíya84 and the ‘Awámil,85 two Arabicgrammar textbooks,86 with Shaykh Mu ammad b. ḥ Shaykh Mu sin,ḥ 87

who was his formal teacher. Shaykh A mad is reported toḥhave been acquainted in early life with Ibn Abí Jumhúr,88

the author of al-Mujlí,89 and to have received furtherinstruction90 from Qu b al-Dín Mu ammad ṭ ḥ Shírází Dhahabi, whosubscribed to the doctrines of Ibn al-‘Arabí (d. 637/1239),which he apparently was teaching in Ba rayn. This seems toḥbe the first intellectual acquaintance of Shaykh A mad withḥthe theosophy of Ibn al-‘Arabí, which later became one ofthe main themes in his works.

Upon completing the elementary religious courses in hisnative land, Shaykh Aḥmad went to ‘Atabát to attend theacademic circle of scholars such as Muḥammad Báqir Behbahání

38

(d. 1207/1792), Sayyid Muḥammad Mahdí abá abá’í known asṬ ṭBa r al-‘Ulúm (d. 1212/1797), ḥ Shaykh Ja‘far Najafí known asKáshif al-Ghi á (d. 1231/1815), and Mír Sayyid ‘Alíṭ

abá abá’í (d. 1231/1815).Ṭ ṭ 91 He received ijázas from themost distinguished scholars of his time, obtaining his firstone in 1209/1794.92 Sayyid Muḥammad Mahdí Ba r al-‘Ulúm,ḥwho issued this ijáza, asked Shaykh A mad if he had writtenḥa dissertation. Shaykh A mad presented to him a portion ofḥhis Shar -i Tab iraḥ ṣ .93 Ba r al-‘Ulúm studied it andḥreplied, “You are the one who ought to give me an ijáza.”94

In addition to the ijáza of Ba r al-‘Ulúm,ḥ 95 six eminentscholars of his time issued ijázas to Shaykh A mad: usaynḥ Ḥ‘Alí ‘U fúr (d. 1216/1801),ṣ 96 A mad Ba rání Damistání,ḥ ḥ 97

Mírzá Mahdí Shahrestání (d. 1216/1801),98 Sayyid ‘Alíabá abá’í,Ṭ ṭ 99 Shaykh Ja‘far Najafí,100 and ájj Mu ammadḤ ḥ

Ibráhím Kalbásí (d. 1262/1846).101

Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí as well as ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ KhánKermání have listed the branches of knowledge in whichShaykh A mad was considered a master,ḥ 102 including, inaddition to various branches of Islamic sciences such asrijál, fiqh, tafsír, and literature; astronomy, medicine,geometry, mathematics, and even music. Although his literalmastery of all these sciences is not the issue, it isevident in his own writings that he was gifted with thepower of memory and was able to comprehend even the mostdifficult theological and philosophical problems. His vastknowledge and originality is also attested to by his

39

biographers103 and the religious authorities who issued himijázas.

Although Shaykh A mad received his education from theḥmost learned men of his age, he was never fully satisfiedwith his formal education. Dissatisfaction with the socialand religious atmosphere in which he grew up and his owncontemplative temperament led Shaykh A mad to piety andḥmeditation.104 As a consequence of lengthy meditations andrecitation of the Qur’án, he had recurrent dreams of theimáms. His own perception of his dream associations withthe imáms constituted the spiritual cornerstone of his life,influencing his personality and creating in him an intenselove for the imáms. For Shaykh A mad, his dreams were theḥsource of his knowledge and inspiration. Recalling hischildhood, he states that early in his life the gate ofdreams was opened to him by Imám asan b. ‘Alí.Ḥ 105 In hisfirst dream, an extraordinary experience for him, hepresented several questions to the imám and received answers.It was in this first dream that the imám put his mouth onShaykh A mad’s mouth and that ḥ Shaykh A mad drank the ḥ imám’ssaliva. Shaykh A mad also related that he dreamed of theḥProphet and drank of his saliva as well.106

Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh on the authority of his fatherrelates that the effect of such experiences on Shaykh A madḥwas so strong that he devoted more and more time tomeditation, prayer, and recitation of the Qur’án. It wasnow possible for him to meet with any imám he wished and to

40

present to him any questions of difficulties that heencountered in the understanding of the truth.107

In his autobiography, Shaykh A mad does not mention theḥname of any of the teachers who issued him an ijáza; rather,he states that through his dream he met with Imám ‘Alí b.Muḥammad Hádí and received twelve ijázas from each of thetwelve imáms.108

He made a number of pilgrimages to the shrines of theimáms in Iran, ‘Atabát, Mecca, and Medina. In fact, hespent the last fifty years of his life visiting these holycities, preaching, and teaching the multitudes of studentswho attended his lectures. In the year 1186/1772, whenShaykh Aḥmad was in his twenties, he journeyed to ‘Atabát.The prestige of ‘Atabát as the center for higher Shí‘íeducation and the absence of any scholars in his native landled to this decision. This was the beginning of his directconnection with the center of the Shí‘í intellectual,cultural and academic world. His stay in ‘Atabát, althoughit lasted only one year, was very fruitful for him. He wasable to obtain an ijáza from Sayyid Mu ammad Mahdí Ba rḥ ḥal-‘Ulúm which brought him fame and respect in ‘Atabát andhis native land. Apparently the typhus epidemic of the year1186/1772 caused him to return to his native land.

Knowledge about the life of Shaykh A mad between his returnḥin 1186/1772 and his second departure for ‘Atabát in 1212/1797 is very limited. It is likely that during this periodShaykh Aḥmad devoted most of his time to studying,

41

meditating, and writing rather than to the intellectualchallenges that would occupy him in the following decades ofhis life.

When Shaykh Aḥmad was forty-six years old, the Wahhábíattack on A sá led him to emigrate to Baḥ ṣra in 1212/1797.109

This emigration was a turning point in his life: he neverreturned to his homeland, but remained in Iran and ‘Atabátto the end of his life in 1241/1825. The period 1212/1797to 1241/1825 was the period of his fame, popularity, andclose association with the officials and religious leadersin Iran and ‘Atabát.

The following is a brief chronology of Shaykh A mad’sḥtravels: After he emigrated to Baṣra in 1212/1797, he wentto the small village of Dhuraq where he stayed for aboutthree years. He returned to Baṣra and went to abarát, aḤvillage near Baṣra, returning to Baṣra and proceeding to thevillage of Tanwíyh and then to Nashwah, where he stayed foreighteen months. In 1219/1804 he moved to afawah andṢstayed there for a year. He returned then to Baṣra, and in1221/1806 he went to Najaf, Ká imayn, and then to Iran. Theẓperiod between 1222/1807 and 1229/1813 was mostly spent inYazd. During this time he paid three visits to the shrineof Imám Ri á in Maḍ shhad and made a trip to Tehrán to visitFat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh. He left Yazd in 1229/1813 for I fahán andṣthen continued his journey to Kermánsháh, arriving there inRajab 1229/1813. He departed from Kermánsháh for Mecca in1232/1816 and after his pilgrimage returned to ‘Atabát,

42

where he stayed for about eight months; he then moved backto Kermánsháh in Mu arram 1234/1818. This time he stayed inḥKermánsháh for a few years until he left for another visitto the shrine of Imám Ri á and went to Maḍ shhad via Qazvín,Qom, Tehrán, Sháhrood, and Nishábor. After twenty-two daysin Mashhad he continued his journey to Yazd via Torbat and

abas. Ṭ Shaykh A mad was in Yazd for only three months whenḥhe was ordered by Imám ‘Alí, in one of his dreams, to go to‘Atabát.110 Consequently he left Yazd and went to Kermánsháhvia I fahán, where he stayed about forty days.ṣ 111 Afterstaying in Kermánsháh for one year, he departed for ‘Atabátand Mecca. Shaykh A mad died in Hadíya, about two stagesḥfrom Medina, on 21 Dhí al-Qa‘da 1241/1825112 at the age ofseventy-five and was buried in the cemetery of Baqí‘ inMedina.

According to Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, Shaykh A mad marriedḥeight women and had twenty-nine children: eighteen boys andeleven girls.113 Only seven of his children survived andreached maturity. Among his sons, three are themselvesdistinguished: Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, who wrote the treatise onthe life of his father; Shaykh Muḥammad Taqí, for whomShaykh A mad wrote his autobiography; and ḥ Shaykh ‘Ali or‘Alí Naqí, who was ideologically in disagreement with hisfather. From an intellectual point of view, Shaykh ‘Alí wasthe most learned of Shaykh A mad’s sons.ḥ 114

After the death of Shaykh A mad A sá’í, his disciple,ḥ ḥfollower, and very close companion Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí

43

became the leader of the school. (The life and works ofSayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí will be discussed in a separate chapter.)The spiritual and intellectual ties between Shaykh A mad andḥSayyid Ká im, and the ẓ Shaykh’s trust and confidence inSayyid Ká im, were so obvious to ẓ Shaykh A mad’s followersḥthat, without any appointment, all of them regarded SayyidKáẓim as Shaykh A mad’s only possible successor and recog-ḥnized him as the most authentic interpreter of ShaykhA mad’s doctrines. Consequently, for ḥ Shaykhí doctrines, theworks of Sayyid Ká im are as fundamental as the works ofẓShaykh A mad himself.ḥ

Shaykh A mad’s learning and piety brought him fame,ḥrespect, popularity, and influence. He was welcomed bygovernors, officials, religious leaders, and the masseswherever he traveled. In Yazd, he received letters ofinvitation from Fatḥ ‘Alí Sháh, who had expressed his wishto visit with him personaily.115 Shaykh A mad respondedḥpositively and went to Tehrán, where he was warmly receivedby the Sháh and his court. He was invited to make hisresidence in Tehrán, but Shaykh A mad found the invitationḥincompatible with the piety and simplicity of his life, andsoon left the capital.

It is reported that the governor of Kermánsháh,Muḥammad ‘Alí Mírzá, known as Rukn al-Dawla, felt so honoredthat he went four-farsakhs (about 13.5 miles) out of the cityto welcome Shaykh A mad to Kermánḥ sháh.116 The same kind ofrespect and hospitality was also paid Shaykh A mad by theḥ

44

governors of Torbat and abas.Ṭ 117 In I fahán, adr al-Dawlaṣ Ṣis said to have presented the village of Kamál Ábád toShaykh A mad.ḥ 118

Toward the end of his life, his widespread popularityand fame as well as his doctrinal stand, which some of the‘ulamá regarded as heresy, brought him the bitter experienceof being denounced as a heretic—takfír. During his stay inQazvín, about the year 1239 or 40/1824, Shaykh A mad metḥwith the ‘ulamá of the city, including Mullá Mu ammad TaqíḥBaraghání (d. 1264/1847), the famous and influentialreligious leader of the city. In one of their meetings,Baraghání raised some theological questions and askedShaykh Aḥmad to explain his views. After hearing ShaykhA mad’s views, Baraḥ ghání stated that Shaykh A mad’s answersḥwere not in accordance with the universally accepted beliefsof the Shí‘a and declared Shaykh A mad a heretic.ḥ 119

Baraghání’s opposition was the first and most importantopposition Shaykh A mad encountered.ḥ

Baraghání’s opposition was the beginning of seriousintellectual as well as physical conflicts which extended to‘Atabát during the time of Sayyid Ká im and resulted in aẓdistinction between the followers of the Shaykhí school andthe rest of the Shí‘í community. Although it is not clearwhen the appelation of “Shaykhí” was first applied to thefollowers of Shaykh A mad, it seems that the ḥ takfír ofQazvín contributed to the distinct identity of the; followersof Shaykh A mad, and the ḥ Shí‘a gave them the title in order

45

to differentiate them from the Shí‘a. The term Shaykhí wasused in contrast with the Mutasharri‘ín which, in this case,stands for the Shí‘a.120

The Shaykhís were also given the title of “Posht-iSarís” (literally, “behind the head”). When he visited theshrine of an imám, it was Shaykh A mad’s custom, as a matterḥof respect and politeness, to stand at the foot of the graveand not circumambulate it. This practice was adopted by hisfollowers and came to distinguish them from other Shí‘a who,because they circumambulated the graves of the imáms werecalled “Bálá Sarís” (literally, “above the head”).121

The Shaykhís are also known as Kashfíya. Sayyid Ká imẓexplains that they were given this name because God lifted(kashf) from their intellect and from their vision the veilof ignorance and lack of insight into the Religion, andremoved the darkness of doubt and uncertainty from theirminds and their hearts. They are the ones whose hearts Godillumined with the light of guidance.122

Although the terms “Shaykhí”, “Posht-i Sarí”, and“Kashfíya” refer to a certain group of people, and wereintended to distinguish them from the rest of Shí‘a, thegroup solidarity and identity of the Shaykhís was in factnot so distinct as to sharply separate them from the rest ofthe Shí‘í community of Iran as an independent sect or evenbranch of Twelver Shí‘a. The Shaykhís considered themselvestrue Shí‘a who thought and behaved in accordance with theteaching of the Shí‘í imáms; they did not consider them-

46

selves innovators.

It is difficult to believe that during Shaykh A mad’sḥlifetime he was considered the founder of a new school ofthought within the Shí‘í framework. However, as time wenton and the nature of his ideology received greater intellec-tual attention, a group of fundamentalist ‘ulamá perceived aradical distinction between his views and the establisheddoctrines of the Shí‘a and increasingly differentiatedthemselves from the Shaykhís. The Shaykhí school, then,gained more group solidarity as it developed historically,reacting as a group against the main body of the Shí‘a whenit encountered social and intellectual opposition.

Shaykh A mad states that his views were based onḥunderstanding and knowledge derived, in dreams, fromcommunications with the imáms; that he received the Truthfrom them; and that whatever he learned was in accordancewith the Traditions of the imáms.123 He acknowledges himselfto be in opposition to the leading philosophers ( ukamáḥ ) andtheologians (mutakallimín) on most theological questions,however, he asserts that his doctrinal positions are rootedin, and fundamentally in accordance with, the Traditionswhich derive this authority from the imáms. Shaykh A madḥbelieved that it was impossible to name a Tradition that wasagainst his own sayings. Therefore, since the majority ofthe philosophers’ and theologians’ views were in disagree-ment with the views of Shaykh A mad, they were consequentlyḥin disagreement with the Traditions of the imáms. He goes

47

on to say that the majority of the theologians and philoso-phers do not know the true meaning of the sayings of theimáms, which they interpret in a way contrary to the intentof the imáms.124 Although he asserts that the main source ofhis knowledge and understanding is his dreams, he endeavorsto base his understanding in the Qur’án and the Traditions.125

The combination of these two sources is supported bypersonal reasoning.

To clarify Shaykh A mad’s approach, Sayyid Ká im Raḥ ẓ shtí,in the Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , states that the source ofShaykh A mad’s knowledge was not only his dreams, but theḥQur’án, Sunna, and Traditions of the imáms as well. Inaddition to these sources, Shaykh A mad used his intellectḥand personal reasoning. Sayyid Ká im points out that ẓ ShaykhA mad has applied both the external reasoning and itsḥinternal meaning.126 To distinguish between the Shaykhís andthe philosophers, Sayyid Ká im states that philosophers useẓthe intellect (reasoning) in discussing theological problems,whether or not the result is in accordance with the Sharí‘a.In contrast, we (the Shaykhís), he states, are not amongthose who rely only upon intellect. We consider theintellect as one tool, then we consider the clear (mu kamátḥ )verses of the Qur’án if they are in agreement with ourrational reasoning. Then we consider the Traditions, thatis, only the musallam (indisputable), mashhúr (well-known,evident) and ghayr mutashábíh (unambiguous) Traditions, andnot all of the Traditions, if they are in agreement with

48

rational reasoning and the Book. Then we consider theMadhhab,127 if it is in agreement with the three others.Then we consider the law of the universe (al-áyát al-murattaba fi al-áfáq wa al-anfus)128 as the fifth tool to reach to the Truth.129

Sayyid Ká im believes that while reason alone isẓinsufficient for establishing any regulation, if the contentof a weak Tradition, weak either because of its text or itschain of narrators, is not in contradiction with the Book,Sunna, and Ijmá‘, then reasoning can be the arbiter of thevalidity of such a Tradition.130

Regarding the validity of Traditions, Sayyid Ká imẓbelieves that there are two kinds of mutawátir131 (successive)Traditions: al-mutawátirát al-ma‘nawíya (spirituallysuccessive; that is, relating to the sense of import of aTradition as opposed to literal Traditions) and al-mutawátirát al-laf íyaẓ (literally successive). Thespiritually successive Traditions are undoubtedly reliable,but the literally successive Traditions, although on theauthority of the imáms, are not reliable because of thepossibility that the imám had practiced dissimulation(taqíya)132 for himself or for his community.133

From the Shaykhí point of view, the U úlís’ approachṣtowards jurisprudential problems is justified. According toSayyid Ká im, the Book, ẓ Sunna, Ijmá‘, and Reasoning (orBook, adíḤ th, Sunna, and Reasoninq)134 are the legislativesources.135 But the Shaykhís, unlike the Akhbárís, do not

49

believe that the whole body of Traditions are substantiallyvalid. Traditions, however, are undoubtedly valid assecondary support.136

On the basis of these established methods for reaching theTruth, it is evident that Shaykh A mad was neither anḥAkhbárí nor an U úlí, although he made use of the methods ofṣthe two groups. Shírvání rightly points out that ShaykhA mad was an ḥ ‘árif (gnostic, saint) among the ‘ulamá and an‘álim among the ‘urafá.137

Sayyid Ká im appreciates the approach of those ẓ Shí‘í‘ulamá through the centuries who were not merely concernedwith the superficial aspects of law, but were illumined byan inspiration which came to them through their piety.Sayyid Ká im gives the names of some of them: Mu ammad b.ẓ ḥMuḥammad b. Nu‘mán Shaykh al-Mufíd (d. 413/1022), Mu ammadḥb. asan al- osí (d. 460/1067), asan b. Sadíd al-DínḤ Ṭ Ḥ‘Alláma al- illí (d. 726/1325), Mu ammad b. Makkí (known asḤ ḥShahíd al-Thání) (d. 966/1558), and A mad b. Mu ammadḥ ḥMuqaddas al-Ardabílí (d. 993/1585).138

Sayyid Ká im regards his teacher, ẓ Shaykh A mad, as theḥman who exposed the innovations of the úfís and pointed outṢthe misunderstandings of the theologians. Sayyid Ká imẓbelieves that Shaykh Aḥmad followed in the path of theProphet and glorified the significance of the station of theimáms.139

For Sayyid Kázim, the ‘ulamá are the deputies of theimáms among the people and, in the absence of the ujjatḤ

50

(Proof, i.e., the Hidden Imám), the interpreters of the wordof God. People are divided into two groups: the muqallids(imitators) and the mujtahids (leaders, strivers),140 butijtihád is not an absolute necessity for the communitybecause it is against the Traditions of the imáms, and thetext of the Qur’án does not indicate the necessity of suchan institution. He says that much knowledge is required toreach the rank of ijtihád and that very few people haveachieved it.141

The works of Shaykh A madḥIn nearly fifty years of scholarly activity, Shaykh

A mad produced an extensive body of works devoted toḥquestions in all areas of Islamic studies. Indeed, he wasone of the most prolific authors of his time. The study ofhis works, his approach, his sources, the influence upon himof his predecessors, and his intellectual contribution toIslamic thought in general and to the religious attitude ofthe Persians in particular, is an enormous task which is yetto be undertaken.

Abú al-Qásim Ibráhímí, the sixth leader of the school,devoted the second volume of the Fihrist to the works ofShaykh Aḥmad and other leaders of the Shaykhí school. Inthe first chapter of this volume he provides information onthe length, place, and date of publication, number ofchapters, and the name of the questioner for each work. He

51

describes 132 works142 but does not comment on their quality.In the introduction to this volume, Ibráhímí gives thesources of information. He mentions four lists,143 which are:

1. A list arranged by Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí with a shortdescription of each work. Some of the works mentioned inthis list are not extant.

2. A lengthy list of the works of Shaykh Aḥmad andother leaders of the Shaykhí school prepared by ‘Abd al-Majíd Fá’iqí and including the number of lines, the questions,and brief answers given to the questions posed in each work.

3. A short list of the works of the first four leadersof the school, provided by an unknown author, which is usedas the foundation for the information in the Fihrist.

4. A list of the works of the Shaykh prepared byMuḥammad áhír Ṭ Khán, the author of a treatise on the life ofShaykh Aḥmad. Bibliographical information in this treatiseis basically derived from the list of Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí.

Ibráhímí has used these four lists as primary sourcesfor his list of Shaykh Aḥmad’s works in the Fihrist.Therefore, the Fihrist contains the most comprehensive listof the works of Shaykh Aḥmad, although it does not go beyondproviding bibliographical information on each work.

In addition to the four sources given above and theFihrist, the booklet Fihrist Ta áníf al-‘Alláma al-ṣ ShaykhA mad al-A sá’íḥ ḥ , by Riyá áhir,ḍ Ṭ 144 contains a briefbiography of Shaykh Aḥmad followed by a list of 104 of hisworks, as well as references to the location of some of

52

Shaykh A mad’s manuscripts in the libraries of Iraq andḥTehrán University.

The author of the Fihrist has categorized the 132 works ofShaykh A mad into nine chapters according to the mainḥsubject of the work:

1. Works on divine theology and virtues2. Works on doctrines and refutation of his opponents’ views3. Preaching and mysticism4. Works on principles of fiqh5. Works on fiqh6. Commentaries on the Qur’án and Traditions7. Works on philosophy and practical wisdom8. Works on literature9. Other works145

A glance at Shaykh A mad’s works shows that theḥmajority were written in response to the religious,theological, and philosophical questions of his students,followers, other scholars, rulers, and other individualswhose identity is not known. These works of reply usuallyhave as titles the name of the questioner. Thus the workentitled Rísála-i Ba ráníyaḥ was composed in response to thequestions of Sayyid usayn b. Sayyid ‘Abd al-Qádir Ba rání.Ḥ ḥIn such work, Shaykh A mad answered varied questions inḥdifferent fields of Islamic sciences. Some questionersasked him up to seventy different questions. As a result,very rarely is a work devoted to one specific subject.

53

Since often people asked him the same question, it is notunusual to encounter the same response in several works.

Shaykh Aḥmad also wrote commentaries, and it was forthis that he became best known. Although he did not write acommentary on the entire Qur’án, he did write them on anumber of Quranic verses. He also wrote commentaries onseveral Traditions attributed to the Prophet and the imáms.Of the latter, the Shar al-Ziyáraḥ is the most important.

Shaykh A mad was the leading nineteenth centuryḥreligious commentator on the works of Mullá adrá (d. 1050/Ṣ1640), his commentaries on the Mashá‘ir and the ‘Arshíyabeing of special importance. Shaykh Aḥmad also wrotecommentaries on the Risála-i ‘Ilmíya of Mullá Mu sin Fayḥ ḍ(d. 1091/1680) and the Tab irat al-Muta‘allimínṣ of asan b.ḤSadíd al-Dín ‘Alláma al- illí (d. 726/1325). Ḥ Shaykh A madḥalso wrote commentaries on some of his own earlier works:for example, his Shar -i Fawá’idḥ was a commentary on hisearlier work, the Fawá’id.

The majority of Shaykh A mad’s works are undated; ofḥthose works which do bear a date, is not clear whether thedate refers to the work’s composition or its copying at alater time. Furthermore, the place of composition isusually not stated. Therefore, a chronological arrangementof his works, which could have shed light on his life andthe development of his ideas, is impossible. The earliestdate on a work of Shaykh A mad’s is 1197/1782. Written atḥthe request of Shaykh Músá b. Mu ammad á’iḥ Ṣ gh, this work is

54

a short treatise of twenty-six lines on the birth and adventof the expected Qá’im, in curious language.146 The lastdated work of Shaykh A mad is a treatise dated 8 ḥ Sha‘bán1239/1823, which responds to the questions of Shaykh Ya‘qúbb. ájj Qásim Ḥ Shírvání and in which Shaykh A mad elaboratedḥprevious statements on matter and form.147

The language of Shaykh A mad is complicated byḥtechnical terms, allegorical expressions, and extensivegnostic terminology. This was probably one reason whyShaykh A mad himself, his successors, and many others afterḥthem found it necessary to write explanations on his works.

Shaykh A mad wrote some works for the intellectualḥelite (khawáṣṣ), and others for laymen. Those works whichhe wrote for the elite have a rather allegorical andambiguous tone, whereas those he wrote for a generalaudience are more straightforward and, in content, closer tocommon beliefs. Therefore, since the tone of each of ShaykhA mad’s works depended upon the audience for which the workḥwas intended, a great deal of familiarity with the circum-stances under which a work was written is required in orderto come to a solid and mature understanding of his doctrines.

The extensive number of Shaykh A mad’s works does notḥpermit providing a sketch of each work here. The topics hediscusses are also too numerous to fully list. Hence, onlya cursive examination of his works which incorporate thedistinguishing features of his thought is attempted.

55

Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥThis work is a commentary on the Ziyárat al-Jami‘a

written at the request of Sayyid asan b. Sayyid Qásim al-Ḥusayní al-IḤ shkavarí al-Jílání in 1230/1814. The Ziyárat

al-Jámi‘a is a prayer of visitation of the holy shrines ofthe imáms, related on the authority of Imám ‘Alí b.Mu ammad Naqí (the Tenth Imám, known as Imám al-Hádí)ḥ(d. 254/868) and is recorded by Ibn Bábawayh (Shaykh adúq)Ṣ 148

and Shaykh Abú Ja‘far Mu ammad b. al- asan al- osí.ḥ Ḥ Ṭ 149 Theprayer is well known among the Shí‘a, and several Shí‘íscholars have written commentaries on it.150

In the Shar al-Ziyáraḥ , Shaykh A mad quotes the text ofḥthe prayer phrase by phrase, gives the meaning of eachphrase, and then discusses its theological and religiousaspects.

Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí began a commentary on the Shar al-ḥZiyára, but as he himself states, he realized that he wasunqualified for the task and therefore left his commentaryunfinished.151 Sayyid Ká im states that ẓ Shaykh A mad wasḥinspired and directed by the imáms while he wrote the Sharḥ.According to Sayyid Ká im, ẓ Shaykh A mad revealed some of theḥsecret and esoteric nature of the prayer and brought to-gether in this work the áhirẓ (external), i.e., sharí‘a(religion) and the bá inṭ (internal), i.e., aqíqaḥ (reality).152

An unpublished abridgment of this book was made by MírMu ammad usayn á’irí ḥ Ḥ Ḥ Shahrestání (d. 1315/1897), entitledTalwí al-Iḥ shára fí Talkhís Shar al-Ziyáraḥ .153

56

The Shar al-Ziyáraḥ of Shaykh A mad is a collection ofḥthe most important theological problems in Shí‘í thought.The “Ziyára” itself is a master work in expressing thestatus of the imáms and Shaykh A mad explains its status asḥsuch. The Shar al-Ziyáraḥ was published in 1267/1850 and in1276/1859 in lithography in Tabríz.

Shar Tab iraḥ ṣOne of the earliest of Shaykh A mad’s works, thisḥ

commentary on the Tab irat al-Muta‘allimín fí A kám al-Dínṣ ḥ ,a well-known work of fiqh by ‘Alláma al- illí,Ḥ 154 is thetreatise Shaykh A mad presented to Ba r al-‘Ulúm and forḥ ḥwhich he received his first ijáza.155

Shar ‘ala al-Risálat al-‘IlmíyaḥThe Risálat al-‘Ilm is a theological treatise by Fayḍ

Káshání, on the knowledge of God. Shaykh A mad wrote aḥcommentary on this work at the request of Mírzá BáqirNawwáb156 in Kermánsháh in 1230/1814.157 This Sharḥ waspublished in the Jawámi‘ al-Kilam.158

Shar al-Maḥ shá‘ir

Al-Mashá‘ir is a work of Mullá adrá. Ṣ Shaykh A madḥwrote a commentary on this work at the request of MulláMashhad b. Mullá usayn ‘Alí Ḥ Shabestarí. This work dealswith the philosophical question of the essence of Being.The Shar al-Maḥ shá‘ir was written in 1234/1818.159

57

Shar al-‘Arḥ shíya

Al-‘Arshíya is another work by Mullá adrá. Ṣ ShaykhAḥmad wrote a commentary on it in Kermánsháh at the requestof Mullá Mashhad b. Mullá usayn ‘Alí Ḥ Shabestarí.160 Thecommentary consists of two volumes; the first, written in1234/1818, regarding mabda’ (God) and the second, written in1236/1820, regarding the ma‘ád (return). The Shar al-ḥ‘Arshíya was published in 1271/1854 and 1279/1862.

Fawá’id

This general theological work, which Shaykh A mad wroteḥin Yazd in 1211/1796,161 deals mainly with three Beings:Being of God (wujúd al- aqqḥ ), Being of Unlimited (wujúd al-mu laqṭ ), and Being of Limited (wujúd al-muqayyad). TheFawá’id consists of twelve Fá’ida. In 1233/1817, at therequest of Mullá Mashhad b. usayn ‘Alí, Ḥ Shaykh A mad wroteḥa commentary on this work entitled the Shar al-Fawá’idḥ . Inthe Sharh al-Fawá’id, Shaykh A mad defines the terms he hasḥused in the Fawá’id. The book was published in 1272/1855and 1287/1870. In the Shar al-Fawá’idḥ , seven Fá’ida areadded to the twelve Fá’ida of the original work.

In addition, two of Shaykh A mad’s students haveḥwritten commentaries on the Fawá’id. Shaykh Mu ammad usaynḥ ḤSemnání, who wrote his commentary in 1233/1817; and ShaykhMullá Ká im Semnání. Both commentaries exist only inẓmanuscript form.162

58

ayát al-NafsḤThis book was written on the five principles of Islamic

belief, i.e., taw ídḥ (oneness of God), ‘adl (justice),nubuwwat (prophethood), imámat (imamate), and ma‘ád (return).The book’s epilogue concerns the necessity of belief in theadvent of the promised Qá’im. The work was written in 1236/1820163 and published in the Jawámi‘ al-Kilam in 1273/1856.This work was translated into Persian by Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí.

59

60

61

62

IIIThe basic Shaykhí ontological doctrines

The ontological doctrines of Shaykh A mad constituteḥthe most important link between the Shaykhí school and themainstream of Islamic thought. In these views he relateshis thought to Shí‘a and challenges Sunní and úfí positions.Ṣ

Shaykh A mad’s ontological doctrines do not constituteḥany new system of ontological thought, nor did the Shaykhhimself ever claim to have produced such a system. Theimportance of Shaykh A mad, however, lies in the emphasis heḥplaced on certain theological doctrines and the new frame-work into which he put them. It lies also in the doubt thathe cast upon some of the well-accepted doctrines of theMuslim philosophers and the úfís.Ṣ

Shaykh A mad’s primary purpose was to purify Islamicḥthought from the intellectual innovations of those Muslimscholars who neglect the imáms’ teachings and rely upontheir own understanding. Although a Shí‘a himself, hisattitude toward the purification of Islam was not limited toShí‘í innovation.

His standard for understanding the Truth was the Qur’ánand the Shí‘í Traditions, and he considered himself theinterpreter of the Truth as revealed in these works. Thushe severely criticized the religious scholars who had notsought the truth from infallible sources, i.e., the imáms,whom God made the guardian for His people. Shaykh A mad,ḥ

63

who regarded himself as a revealer of the truth, asked hisaudience to disregard those innovated thoughts that maydivert one from the right path and urged them to heed hiswords, in which the truth is expressed, and to seek thetruth with their own understanding and judgment instead ofimitating others. The understanding and judgment to whichthe Shaykh refers is based on intellectual reasoning as wellas intuition. A man can comprehend the truth from thesayings of the imáms if he detaches himself from innovatedthoughts and refers to the genuine source of inspiration andintellectual reasoning.164

The two primary sources for the Shaykh ontologicaldoctrines are (1) the commentaries Shaykh A mad himselfḥwrote on certain Quranic verses and Shí‘í Traditions, andthose theological and philosophical treatises he wrote atthe request of individuals; and (2) the works Sayyid Ká imẓRashtí wrote to elaborate Shaykh A mad’s doctrines, worksḥequally important for Shaykhí ontology.165

This chapter will focus on ontological questions thathave been given prominence in Shaykh works, with attentiongiven only to aspects of these questions which areparticularly important for Shaykh A mad and which differen-ḥtiate his school from others.

A fundamental question that has always occupiedscholars of Islamic theology is the nature of God, Hisattributes, and His relationship with material being. Thesame question is a central concern in all the Shaykh’s

64

doctrines. According to the Qur’án, basic Islamic doctrineholds that God is eternal, single since eternity, andincomprehensible. Among these attributes, the absoluteimpossibility of comprehending the essence (dhát) of God, asthe most important ontological principle, has received greatemphasis in the works of the Shaykhís. On the impossibilityof knowing God’s essence, Sayyid Ká im says that knowledgeẓcan exist only when there is a similarity between the knownand the knower. Thus, the essence of God can not be knownbecause no similarity exists between God and the knower,i.e., man: God is eternal (qadím) and man is “accident”( ádiḥ th), and there is absolutely no similarity betweeneternal and accident.166

There is no doubt that as long as there is nocorrelation (munásabat) or similarity (mushábahat) betweentwo things, one can not cite an example from it. Thus, onecan not say that water is a thing like (mithál) fire or heatis a thing like cold or wind is a thing like earth, and soon. If correlation were not a condition of citing anexample, one could cite an example between any two things,but this obviously can not be done, as above examples show.In the case of God, there exists nothing in the materialworld similar to God; therefore, one can not describe Him byciting an example from the material world or know Himthrough likeness. Possible Being is only able to understanda subject within the realm of the Possible and is not ableto understand anything beyond it, i.e., the Necessary Being.167

65

Thus, if Possible Being wants to cite an example from theNecessary Being, it needs two things; first, it needs tocomprehend the Essence of the Necessary Being, to knowwhether the example is His example or not. Second, it needsto cite the example by using phenomena from Possible Being,because it was proved that the Necessary Being is one andthere must exist a correlation between one object (mithl)and the object to which it is being compared (mumathal),otherwise it is not its likeness (mithál). In order to citean example from God, resemblance (mithl) and likeness to Himis necessary, and this is in contradiction with the beliefthat there is no likeness (shabíh), comparison (na írẓ ), orresemblance (mithl) for God, because the Qur’án says,“Nothing is like a likeness of Him; and He is the Hearing,the Seeing.” (42:11) And also it reads, “Therefore do notgive a likeness to Allah; surely Allah knows and you do notknow.” (16:74) Thus, such terms as “resemblance”, “related-ness”, “equivalent”, “corresponding”, “parallel”, and so on,only define Possible Being and cannot refer to the NecessaryBeing.

Furthermore, in order to know something, the knower isrequired to be superior (i á aḥ ṭ ) over the subject that is tobe known. The subject, in this case God, cannot becomprehended as the Qur’án says, He [God] knows what isbefore them and what is behind them, and they cannotcomprehend anything out of His knowledge.” (2:255) Andalso, “Nay: they reject that of which they have no

66

comprehensive knowledge.” (10:39) And, “Vision comprehendsHim not, and He comprehends (all) vision; and He is theKnower of subtilities, the Aware.” (6:104) These versesindicate that nothing, neither inspired knowledge ( u úríḥ ḍ )nor imagination (ta awwurṣ ), is able to comprehend Him. Oneonly comprehends those subjects within the limitations ofone’s comprehension, and even those are not necessarilywhat exists in reality. For example, if one sees thereflection of a star in the water, one is not seeing thetrue star, but rather the image ( úratṣ ) and the example(mithál) of the star, which is nothing but water. Therefore,whatever Possible Being comprehends is only Possible Beingand nothing beyond that, i.e., Necessary Being. Thisattitude is based on Traditions such as the one on theauthority of Imám Ri á which reads, “One does not know Godḍif he points out a similarity between Him and His creation;and one does not understand His oneness but puts up acompanion to God if he believes that he has comprehended Hisvery Essence; and one does not reach His recognition, whoholds up a likeness (mithál) for Him and puts up aresemblance (mithl) for Him; and one does not believe in HisDiety, who maintains infinity for Him; and one does noteliminate anthropomorphism for Him who has pointed atHim. … Whatever one comprehends is the creation of hisown comprehension (and not what exists out of him inreality).”168

Not only can man not comprehend God, but neither can

67

the prophets of God, who are more excellent than man. TheProphet Mu ammad, who, according to Sayyid Ká im was moreḥ ẓexcellent than the other prophets, says, “We did notcomprehend You as You deserve to be comprehended” (má‘arafnáka aqqa ma‘rifatikaḥ ).169

Just as man cannot comprehend the Essence of NecessaryBeing, he cannot properly speak about Him, since, in orderto do so, he must comprehend Him. Speech is the externalexpression of intellect or imagination, and, since neitherintellect nor imagination is able to comprehend God,speaking about His Essence, as It is, is impossible. ATradition on the authority of Imám Báqir states, “Speakabout anything but do not speak about God. Speaking aboutGod does nothing but increase the speaker’s perplexity.”170

The attributes of God are of two kinds: essential(dhátíya) attributes, which have no connection withcontingencies, and actional (fi‘líya or imkání or mu daḥ th)attributes.171 Perfect belief in the oneness of God requiresone to regard the essential attributes as identical with theessence of God. There is absolutely no separation betweenHis essence and, for example, His knowledge (‘ilm), which isan essential attribute. Knowledge is His essence andessence is His knowledge, without distinction. In thisrespect, we neither know what His knowledge is (as we do notknow what His essence is), nor how He knows. Since theessential attributes such as knowledge, power (qudrat),hearing (sam‘) and vision (ba arṣ ), cannot be separated from

68

Him, God cannot be attributed with their opposites, i.e.,ignorance (jahl), weakness (‘ajz), and so on.

Essential attributes are pre-existent, i.e., they haveexisted as long as the essence of God has existed; however,this does not imply that essential attributes may beconsidered as separate from essence.

There exists no distinction between essential attri-butes: knowledge is identical with power and power is Hisknowledge without distinction.172 Since the essence of God isunknowable, His essential attributes, which are identicalwith His essence, are also unknowable.

The second kind of attributes are actional attributes,which are quite different from essential attributes.Actional attributes come into being when God acts in therealm of Possible Being, or as long as His actions areregarded in Possible Being. To clarify the nature of theactional attributes, Shaykh A mad gives the followingḥexample: when a man writes, as a result of the action ofwriting we learn that he is a scribe and we can describe himas such. If the same man sews a garment, through his actionof sewing we discover that he is a tailor and can describehim as such. The attributes, i.e., scribe and tailor, arenot part of his essence, but rather his essence is singleand not composed of the elements of being a tailor and ascribe. The man who performs these functions is perfectenough (capable) to perform them. This does not indicatethat he is made up of these functions. There exists only

69

one single essence, i.e., the man, who acts as a tailor oras a scribe. The multiple aspects of this essence appear assoon as he acts. Before his actions took place, he was asingle essence, and after he acted, his essence was stillsingle and unchanged. Likewise the multiplicity of God’sattributes is conceivable only when His actions are viewedin Possible Being.173

In contrast to essential attributes, actional attri-butes are new ( ádiḥ th) and created (makhlúq). Will(mashí’a), decree (iráda), and speech (kalám), in theShaykh’s view, are actional attributes and, therefore, arenew and created.174 God can be attributed with the actionalattributes, or, in contrast to essential attributes, withtheir opposites. For example, God may will or may not will.

Since there is no similarity between the NecessaryBeing and Possible Being, none of the qualities andattributes applied to Possible Being are applicable to theNecessary Being, and none of the qualities and attributes ofthe Necessary Being are applicable to Possible Being. Inother words, the attributes of Possible Being do not existin the Necessary Being, and vice versa. Therefore, man’sknowledge, power, and life is not like God’s knowledge,power, and life. Man’s knowledge, power, and life, or man’sconcept of them, are conditioned by the limitations ofPossible Being and are not similar to the knowledge, power,and life that God possesses. God has knowledge, power, andlife, but one whose intellect is limited by the conditions

70

of Possible Being is not able to comprehend them. God ispowerful and all-knowing; if He were not, it would have beennecessary for Him to be imperfect and this is not possiblefor God.

We attribute to God the qualities we think a perfectbeing should possess. These attributes, however, are signsof perfection only to us. This does not mean that Heactually possesses them, because we know nothing about Hisessence. In fact, by assigning God certain attributes weimply the absence of their opposites and do not prove theseattributes to Him.

God is known to Possible Being only through His actionsand works, but because they are conditioned by the limita-tions of Possible Being, they do not define His essence.Even God’s description of Himself, since it is intended tobe understood by man, has been expressed within thelimitation of Possible Being and is not a description ofwhat He really is.175

The Qur’án and Traditions tell us that the purpose ofexistence is to know and worship God.176 But Shaykh A madḥbelieves that man cannot know God. He resolves thisapparent contradiction by suggesting that man is created toknow God only through His actions (af‘ál) and works (áthár),not to know His essence, which is beyond man’s intellectualcomprehension. God created all things by means of Hisaction, not His essence. The action of God, which isidentical with His will (mashí’a) and decree (iráda},

71

creates the creation from absolute nothingness. ShaykhAḥmad refers to a Tradition on the authority of Imám Ri áḍwhich states that the terms mashí’a, iráda, and ibdá‘ aresynonymous.177

Since Shaykh A mad denies any relationship between theḥNecessary Being and Possible Being, he must explain howPossible Being came into existence, and the nature of therelationship between the eternal (qadím) and the new( ádiḥ th). Shaykh A mad accepts the view that only a singleḥbeing can issue from the essence of God, which is single.Consequently, the Single Being (God) issues forth His singlewill by itself, as an act and not as a part of His essence.The will, which is the first creation of God, is calledGod’s possible will (al-mashí’at al-imkáníya). From it,Possible Being comes into existence. This view is found ina Tradition an the authority of Imám ádiq, which reads,Ṣ“God created the will by itself, and then the will createdthings” (khalaqa Alláhu al-mashí’ata bi nafsihá thummakhalaqa al-ashyá’a bi al-mashi’a).178 On the basis of thisTradition, Shaykh A mad explains that the will is aḥ“creative movement” (al- arakat al-íjádíyaḥ )179 which,although created (mu daḥ th), depends upon nothing exceptitself. Thus, when we say that God created the will byitself, we mean that the will is a single thing by itselfand in its essence, i.e., the will is not “a” thing and its“self” something else; rather, the will is the simplestthing in the realm of Possible Being. Shaykh A mad hasḥ

72

called the simplicity of the will the “possible simplicity”(al-bisá at al-imkáníyaṭ ) to differentiate it from thesimplicity of God.180

The will is at the highest level of the hierarchy ofPossible Being and has produced everything below it; thewill was the first being, preceding all else in the realm ofPossible Being. The will is eternal (sarmad) and God hascreated (a daḥ tha) the possibilities (imkánát) of things fromit in a general, infinitive sense (‘alá wajhin kullin láyatanáhí) in the Possible Being.181

Shaykh A mad states that the possible (ḥ imkán) is thesource (mansha’ or a lṣ ) of the existent (wujúd or akwán).182

As an adjective depends upon the noun it qualifies,existence depends upon the possible. The relationshipbetween the possible and the existent, in a more tangibleexample, is like the relationship between sperm and a man.183

When we say that things exist in the possible realm wemean that they exist collectively, and not individually, inthe will. It is the will which produces the individualityof things and issues them into Possible Being one afteranother. We need to think in this way because God is notaffected by time; therefore past, present, and future areidentical to Him, even though from the Possible Being pointof view, the action is past or is yet to occur. If thiswere not so, God would be in the position of “waiting”(munta iraẓ ),184 which, as a deficiency, would be inconsistentwith His perfection.

73

From the fact that to God, every thing is in thepresent we do not mean that things are eternal, for only theessence of God is eternal. We mean, rather, that thingsreceive their existence as soon as they are created. Forexample, Adam was created at one time and Zayd at another.Both times are in the present to God, each one in its ownturn. We exist here and now: before this moment we had noexistence. Likewise, Adam existed at his time and Zayd athis time, but, to God all of these times and places are inthe present.

Shaykh A mad’s doctrines on God and His attributes,ḥparticularly God’s knowledge, put him in serious disagree-ment with the úfís, such as Ibn al-‘Arabí (d. 638/1240);Ṣtheologians, such as Mullá Mu sin Fay Káḥ ḍ shání (d. 1091/1680); and philosophers, such as Mullá adrá (d. 1050/1640).ṢWhile a detailed study of the points of disagreement betweenShaykh A mad and these three eminent figures of Islamicḥthought would be beyond the scope of this work, a discussionof the major points as they are revealed in the Shaykh’sbetter known works, should suffice to illustrate the dispute.

Among the úfís, Mu y al-Dín Ibn al-‘Arabí has beenṢ ḥseverely criticized in the works of Shaykh A mad. ḥ ShaykhA mad sarcastically calls Mu y al-Dín (Reviver of religion),ḥ ḥ“Mumít al-Dín”, (slayer of religion)185 and regards him as aninfidel.

Among úfí thinkers, Ibn al-‘Arabí is a classicalṢexample and the best known representative of Islamic

74

pantheism. His pantheism is clear in his theory of Love.To him, “The ultimate goal of love is to know the reality oflove and that the reality of love is identical with God’sEssence.”186

He praises me and I praise Him,And He worships me and I worship Him.In one state I acknowledge HimAnd in the a‘yán I deny Him.He knows me and I know Him not,And I know Him and behold Him.How can He be independent,When I help Him and assist Him?In my knowing Him, I create Him.187

A basic belief of the úfís, including Ibn al-‘Arabí,Ṣconcerns the love of God and the idea that, in the laststage of the journey to God, the lover may become unifiedwith Him. According to Ibn al-‘Arabí,

Man makes various progresses [sic], which arethought of as a series of journeys (asfár), inparticular three: (1) from God, al-safar‘an Alláh,by which a man having traversed the various worlds(‘awálim) is born into this world, and is thenthus furthest removed from God; (2) to God, al-safar ila’lláh, by which, with the help of a guide,he makes the spiritual journey with the goal ofreaching the “station of junction [with UniversalIntelligence] after separation” (makám al-djam‘ba‘dal-tafri aḳ ); (3) in God, al-safar fi’lláh. Thefirst two journeys have an end, the third hasno end: it is ba á’bi’lláhḳ . The traveller (sálik)who is making the third journey performs thoseprecepts of the sharí‘a which are farḍ; externally,he is living with his fellows; but internally heis dwelling with God. Not every man is capable ofmore than the first journey; only those speciallyendowed (khawáṣṣ) may win to the vision of God,but even for them this depends on certain conditions(shurúṭ), some fulfilled by the traveller (sálik,muríd) himself, some provided by the shaykh. Eventhe Prophet had a shaykh—Gabriel … There willbe awakened in his heart a love (ma abbaḥ ), whichgrows to be a passion (‘ishḳ) quite distinct fromselfish desires (shahwa). It is this passion which

75

particularly brings men to God. On the journeythe sálik experiences a series of “states” (a wálḥ ),some continuing and hence called “resting-places”(ma ámḳ , manzil), at each of which he learns variousma‘árif. When the heart is thoroughly purified,the veil ( idjábḥ ) of those “other” things whichhide God (má siwá’ Alláh) is drawn aside; all things,past, present and future, are known; God grantsthe manifestation (tadjallí) of Himself; and finallyunion with Him (wa lṣ ) is achieved.188

Shaykh A mad maintains there exists connection inḥcreation, but the connection does not physically reach God.No created being can attain to what is not created, i.e.,the Necessary Being. To be able to do so it would have tobe the Necessary Being itself.189 The Necessary Being islimitless, eternal, immortal, and invisible. The world ofcreation, on the contrary, is bound by natural law, finite,mortal, and visible. To him the Necessary Being does notascend or descend and is never an object for any kind ofunification with His creation.

Because there can be no connection between PossibleBeing and the Necessary Being, Shaykh A mad believes that itḥis absolutely impossible for a man, no matter how exalted inrank, to love God and to achieve union with Him. Lovingsomeone, in the views of Shaykh A mad, is a function of soulḥ(nafs) and intellect (‘aql). This function is not possiblewithout the continuous remembrance of the beloved andconcentration on the ways of loving and joining him, whichrequires picturing him. Without imagination, one cannotachieve His remembrance or think about the ways of joiningHim, and this is not possible in the case of God.190 Shaykh

76

A mad’s second major point of disagreement with the úfís,ḥ Ṣparticularly Mu y al-Dín Ibn al-‘Arabí, concerns the úfíḥ Ṣtheory of “unity of being” (wa dat al-wujúdḥ ). According tothis theory, existence (wujúd) is described as one plain(basíṭ), continuous thing (shay’ wá idḥ ), which is nothingbut God, and God is nothing but that existence. ShaykhA mad denounced this pantheistic doctrine and thereforeḥdesignated its upholder, Ibn al-‘Arabí, as an infidel.191

Such a doctrine necessitates that God be, on the one hand, acreator, and, on the other, a creature—which is patentlyagainst the basic principle of the Qur’án and the IslamicTraditions.192 Schimmel writes,

The concept of wa dat al-wujúdḥ does not involvea substantial continuity between God and creation.In Ibn ‘Arabí’s thought, a transcendence acrosscategories, including substance, is maintained.God is above all qualities—they are neither Henor other than He—and He manifests Himself onlyby means of the names, not by His essence. Onthe plane of essence, He is inconceivable (trans-cending concepts) and nonexperiential (transcendingeven nonrational cognition). That means that intheir actual existence the creatures are not iden-tified with God, but only reflections of His attri-butes.193

Although Schimmel’s description of an aspect of wa datḥal-wujúd denies that the creatures are identical with God,it still maintains that they are the reflections of Hisattributes. Even if by “attributes” the actional attributesare meant, Shaykh A mad would still not agree with theḥconcept of wa dat al-wujúdḥ as long as God stands at one endof it. It does not seem that even the non-pantheisticinterpretations of Ibn al-‘Arabí’s thought advanced by Henry

77

Corbin and Seyyed H. Nasr would be acceptable to ShaykhA mad, because in these interpretations, too, God is assumedḥto have produced creation as a mirror for His tajallíyát,His manifestations,194 whereas Shaykh A mad maintains thatḥthe mirror for His tajallíyát is His will, from which thecreation came into being.

A basic point of disagreement between Shaykh A mad andḥShí‘í theologians is the question of God’s knowledge. MulláMu sin Fay Káḥ ḍ shání was one of the leading Shí‘í theologianswhose views on God’s knowledge the Shaykh criticized. MulláMu sin believed that God knew about His creation “before” Heḥactually created it. He maintained this because he believedthat God, who is the knower (‘álim), could never have beenwithout knowledge and that this knowledge must always havehad an object.195 This “object” is a created thing aboutwhich God knew since He existed, i.e., since eternity.

Shaykh A mad holds that God’s knowledge is an essentialḥattribute and is identical with His essence, i.e., thatthere is no separation between His essence and His knowledge,and there exists no object for His knowledge becauseknowledge and the essence are identical, i.e., the knowerand the known are the same. God’s knowledge about what Hisessence does is not to be confused with His knowledge of Hisessence itself, because His knowledge of His essence has noobject except His essence. This means that there wasnothing to be known (although He knew His essence, and thatknowledge was identical with His essence), until He created

78

things and knew about them “after” their creation.196

The Shaykh quotes a Tradition on the authority of Imámádiq which reads, “There was God, our respected and exaltedṢ

God, and knowledge was His essence and there was nothingknown [ma‘lúm] to Him. … When He created [a daḥ tha]things and the known came into being, His knowledge came torest [waqa‘a] upon the known”.197 The Shaykh explains thisTradition by saying that God certainly is all-knowing, butat first His knowledge comprehends only His essence, andafter He creates things His knowledge knows them.198

Mullá Mu sin says that God’s knowledge about Himselfḥand His knowledge about His creation are one. Shaykh A madḥbelieves that Mullá Mu sin is wrong in regarding these twoḥkinds of knowledge as one and as identical with His essence.Shaykh A mad, in opposition to Mullá Mu sin, maintains thatḥ ḥGod’s knowledge about Himself and God’s knowledge about Hiscreation are different; the first is a condition of thesecond.199

Mullá Mu sin Fay believes that everything in theḥ ḍmaterial world has two aspects: first, the uncreatedaspect which existed in the mind of God before it came intobeing, an aspect which is eternal and identical with God;second, the definite form it assumed as a material object inthe universe.

Shaykh A mad asserts that Mullá Mu sin’s view isḥ ḥcontrary to that of the imáms, and points out that createdthings ( ádiḥ th) are not under any circumstances eternal

79

(azalí), and that God does not contain both eternal andnew.200

Among the philosophers, Mullá adrá’s views have beenṢextensively discussed in the works of Shaykh A mad, whoḥrejects his theory that the elementary reality is allthings” (basí al- aqíqa Kull al-aṭ ḥ shyá’), which holds thatbeing, although single in its reality, manifests itself withvarying degrees of intensity in different grades ofexistence. The concept of basí al- aqíqaṭ ḥ maintains thatthe being of God and the being of possible being are all onebeing, although they differ from each other in degree ofintensity.

The Essence of God, which is simple (basíṭ), manifestsitself in various degrees and different stages in allthings. Cause and effect, according to the concept ofbasí al- aqíqaṭ ḥ , are fundamentally the same. What differ-entiates things from God is their deficiencies and limita-tions. If one disregards these limitations and deficiencies,only perfection remains, which is identical with the essenceof God, Who is perfect.201

The concept of basí al- aqíqaṭ ḥ holds that the Being,which is absolutely simple and free from any kind oflimitation or composition, contains within it all theattributes of all beings. Thus, the concept refers to ahierarchy, each stage of which includes all those thingsthat are in the stages below it. For example, the firstintellect, which is the first manifestation of God, occupies

80

the second stage in the hierarchy and contains all theattributes of any other being inferior to it. This,however, does not mean that the first intellect contains thequantities of all material bodies, but that all theattributes of all creation are found in the first intellect,God, Who is beyond the first intellect and is the mostsimple Being, possesses all the attributes of the whole ofexistence. If God did not possess the attributes of thewhole creation, He could not have given them to it.202

Shaykh Aḥmad rejects the concept of the basí al- aqíqaṭ ḥby maintaining that, first, there is only one Simple Being;all else is complex, i.e., composed of matter and form.Composed beings differ from one another only in concentra-tion. For example, intellect and stone differ only in thematter of intellect, which is made of the liquid light(al-núr al-dhá’ib), i.e., intellectual matter (al-máddaal-‘un uríyaṣ ). Intellect and stone, lake other createdthings, are created by the action of God and not from HisEssence. They also receive their quiddity—their form—fromHim, because nothing can exist without both existence(wujúd) and quiddity (má íyaḥ ). Second, Shaykh A mad arguesḥthat the concept of basíṭ al- aqíqaḥ implies that thingsexist with God in His Essence. This is not acceptablebecause it, in turn, implies that things are co-eternal withHis Essence, and, in addition, that the Essence of God iscomplex, which are both false, according to Shaykh A mad.ḥ 203

Shaykh A mad believes that even the simplicity ofḥ

81

existence is not conceivable in the Possible Being: thingsthat exist in the realm of the Possible Being occupy adifferent level in the hierarchy, and there is a substantialdifference between things on different levels. For example,there exists no point of comparison between the firstintellect and those things situated below it although thefirst intellect is the cause of their being.204 To elaboratethe point, Shaykh A mad says that the light of Muḥ ḥammad wasthe first creation. From this light, the light of the imámscame to being, and from the light of the imáms the light ofthe believers came into being, all the way down to thelowest level of the hierarchy. It is true that in all theselevels we are talking about one substance—the light—butthe degree of its manifestation is so different that wecannot say that abstract intellects, divine spirits, anddense mineral bodies are alike.205

Shaykh A mad emphasizes that God’s Essence is single,ḥthat there is nothing with it or in it. Things came intobeing as a result of His action in the Possible Being, whichis not in any way comparable with His Essence. If we assumethat things are identical with His Essence or that they arein His knowledge, then His Essence and His creation would beidentical. This assumption is not correct because thecreation is within the realm of Possible Being, and PossibleBeing cannot achieve union with the Necessary Being. ShaykhAḥmad insists that God is absolutely incomprehensible to andunreachable by man. That which man imagines about Him is

82

not the Reality of God; He, the unknowable, the unthinkable,the inconceivable, is far beyond the highest conception ofman.

In summary, the basic ontological doctrines ShaykhA mad sets forth are: (1) God’s Essence, which is simple,ḥis, and has ever been, incomprehensible to and unreachableby man; (2) existence is the creation of God’s action andnot a part of His Essence; (3) His will is an actionalattribute, separated from His Essence, and the cause ofcreation; (4) man is substantially unable to comprehend anybeing which is beyond his possible-conditioned intellect.

Such doctrines led the Shaykh to the belief thatbetween God and man there are intermediaries who bear Hisnames and embody His attributes. They are the manifesta-tions or representatives of God’s power, knowledge, andother attributes in the realm of Possible Being. Therefore.the highest point of comprehension and the ultimate level ofunification for man is comprehension and unification withthe intermediaries, as man has no access to any other beingbeyond them, i.e., God.

The intermediaries are the prophets and the imáms, whoare in reality the hypostasis of the Necessary Being.Although they share certain functions, responsibilities, andqualifications, a prophet occupies a higher rank than animám. The function of prophethood (nubuwwat) is to conveythe will of God to people without a human intermediary. Italso means to inform people of God’s Essence, attributes,

83

actions, and teachings. There are two types of prophethood:prophethood of definition (nubuwwat ta‘ríf) and prophethoodof legislation (nubuwwat tashrí‘). Prophethood of defini-tion has to do with informing people about God, Hisattributes, names, and actions, whereas the prophethood oflegislation, which is identical with messengership (risálat),means establishing moral, social, and political institu-tions—sharí‘a.206

Prophethood is described as the receiving of knowledgeby a purified soul (al-nafs al-qudsíya) from the essence ofthe first intellect (al-‘aql al-awwal), and messengership isdescribed as proclaiming that knowledge to the prepared(musta‘idd) people.207

Regarding the relationship between God and a prophet,Shaykh Aḥmad denies that any point of comparison (nisbat)exist between God and the prophet. If, hypothetically,there were such a relation, the eternal (qadím), i.e., God,would have to be in relationship with the new ( ádiḥ th), theprophet. To hold such an idea is infidelity (kufr) andblasphemy (zandaqa).208 Just as there can be no point ofcomparison between God and His prophet, there can be nonebetween a prophet and an ordinary man. A prophet is the manwho is essentially qualified (qábil) to be a prophet becauseof a particular capability that an ordinary man does notpossess. Thus, God does not choose just any man as Hisprophet, but only the one capable and worthy of proclaimingGod’s message to His people. The essential capability of

84

the prophet is unique among mankind, and no one else iscapable nor worthy of receiving God’s revelation.

This view of the relationship between God and Hisprophet, on the one hand, and between the prophet and thepeople, on the other hand, is one of the major points ofdispute between the Shaykhís and the úfís. The ufísṢ Ṣtraditionally maintain that prophets reach the position ofprophethood through their personal spiritual endeavor.Ascetic practices, including purifying the heart fromtemptations, abandoning all the natural inclinations,subduing human desires, and adhering to meditation andspiritual qualities increase the divine nature in man. Theultimate result of this process is that the individual loseshis personal identity and receives God’s divine identity.According to the úfís, such a journey culminates with theṢability to be a prophet. Although the Shaykhís do not denythat a man makes spiritual progress through asceticpractices, they insist that an ordinary man cannot become aprophet no matter how highly he has development his spirit-ual qualities on the journey. A prophet has a uniquecapability not granted to any other man. Through thespiritual journey this unique capability develops andreaches its highest level. While the journey, by itselfdoes not create the capability, it enhances it. This uniquecapability differentiates a prophet from an ordinary man andgives him a substantial superiority above mankind.

The relationship between a prophet and a man is like

85

that of the sun and its radiance. The radiance cannotachieve the station of the sun, yet its own existencedepends upon it. In the sane way, a man cannot achieve thestation of a prophet, yet his life is dependent upon theprophet’s life.209

Regarding the relationship between a prophet and anangel, the Shaykhís assert that an angel is not made ofmatter and, therefore, has no relationship to the materialworld.210 The station of the prophet, however, is higherthan that of an angel.211 Sayyid Ká im relates a Traditionẓon the authority of the Prophet, who told ‘Alí b. Abí álib,Ṭ“God has not created any one more exalted and more lovedthan me (the Prophet).” When ‘Alí asked the Prophet if hewas more exalted than an angel, the Prophet replied, “O ‘Alí,God has given His “Sent Prophets” [mursalín] a higherstation than His “Close Angels” [muqarrabín] and He hasgiven me a station higher than that of the other prophetsand apostles. After me the highest station is yours andafter you it belongs to the imáms. Verily, the angels areour servants and the servants of our lovers.”212

Shaykh A mad maintains that a prophet, as a receiver ofḥGod’s revelation, is infallible and free from all sin.213

He occupies the highest position in regard to moralstandards, and his infallibility is thought to begin evenbefore his declaration of prophethood.

The Prophet Mu ammad was sent to all creatures withḥproofs of his right to prophethood, the most important of

86

which is the Qur’án. He is the final Prophet until the Dayof Judgment, and the last one in the chain of five prophetswho preceeded him, i.e., Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, andJesus.214 The religion of the prophet, Islam, which issituated at the highest level of the religious hierarchy, isthe most comprehensive religion, and the earlier religionswere only introductions to it.215 Islam abrogates all theprevious religions.

Regarding the relationship between the Prophet Mu ammadḥand the imáms, Shaykh A mad writes that the Prophet is likeḥa house and that the imáms are the people of this house(‘ítrat ahl bayt). Here, “house” stands for kinship,referring to the fact that the imáms are the descendents ofthe Prophet. The house also stands for knowledge (baytal-‘ilm), to which the imáms are like the doors. Thisindication is based on many Traditions such as the one onthe authority of Abú Ja‘far al-Báqir which reads, “Thechildren of Muḥammad [ál Mu ammadḥ ] are the doors to God andthe ways to God.”216

People are created from the radiance of the light ofthe imáms, and, therefore, the imáms are the actional cause(al-‘illat al-fá‘ilíya), as well as the material cause(al-‘illat al-máddíya). The imáms are also the formal cause(al-‘illat al- úríyaṣ ) because the form of every single itemof creation is their form; the imáms are the manifestationof the grace of God, and each creature has its form as aresult of God’s grace. They are also the ultimate cause

87

(al-‘illat al-ghá’í) because God has created things fortheir sake.217

The imáms are the a‘ráf (the area between Paradise andHell), intermediaries through whom God can be understood,i.e., the understanding of God is only possible through theguidance of (ahl al- aqqḥ ), the people of truth, i.e., theimáms.218

The imáms are like the gates between God and creation.or as the keys to His treasure. They are the scene (ma állḥ )of the manifestation of His divine will and power, and theembodiment of His attributes among mankind.219 The imáms, whoare the trustees (umaná’) of God among the people, areinstalled in their position by the will of God, and theProphet only announces the installation. They are free fromall sin, forgetfulness, and ignorance before and after theytake office.220 As the representative of God on earth, theyare the most learned people and the world cannot functionwithout them.221

The imáms are the refuge (malja’), protection (maládh),and authority (marji‘) for every thing that has issued fromHis will, namely, substance (‘ain) or notion (ma‘ná), matter(jawhar) or accident (‘araḍ), essence (dhát) or attribute( ifatṣ ), ecstasy ( álḥ ) or condition ( arfẓ ), and even mater-ial (bu‘d jismí), place (bu‘d makání), and time dimension(bu‘d zamání). In sum, everything takes refuge in thembecause of its poverty and needs.222

The Shaykhí’s believe that certain verses in the Qur’án

88

and the Traditions refer to the imáms, and they interpretthese verses in a way unacceptable to other Muslims. Forexample, one verse of the Qur’án reads, “And He it is Whohas created man from the water, then He had made for himblood-relationship and marriage-relationship and your Lordis powerful.” (25:54) The Shaykhís insist that in thisverse ‘Alí b. Abí álib is the man referred to because heṬhad a blood-relationship and marriage-relationship with theProphet:223 ‘Alí was the Prophet’s cousin and son-in-law.Another verse in the Qur’án reads, “Thus have we made you acentral [intermediate] people, that ye may be witnesses inregard to mankind.” (2:143) The Shaykhís believe that theterms “ummatan wasa anṭ ” (intermediate people) in this verserefers to the imáms. This interpretation is based on aTradition on the authority of Abú ‘Abd Alláh who, when askedabout the meaning of these terms, replied, “We [the imáms]are the intermediate people and we are God’s witnesses amongHis people.”224 Another verse in the Qur’án which theShaykhís believe is a reference to the imáms reads,‘Certainly We created man in the best make [a sani taqwíminḥ ].”(95:4) Shaykh A mad interprets the “best make” as theḥperfect men, i.e., Mu ammad, his twelve sons and hisḥdaughter Fáṭima.225 A Quranic verse reads, “… A goodtree, whose root is firm and whose branches are high.”(14:24) Shaykh A mad says that when Imám Báqir was askedḥabout the meaning of the above verse, he replied on theauthority of the Prophet, “I [the Prophet] am its root

89

[a luháṣ ] and ‘Alí is its branch [far‘uhá]; and the imáms areits twigs [agh ánuháṣ ], our knowledge is its fruit, and ourpeople [shí‘atuná] are its leaves.”226 In addition to theseverses, some Quranic terms such as “The Farthest Lote-Tree”(sidrat al-muntahá) (53:14); “The Garden, The Place to beResorted to” (jannat al-ma’wá) (53:15) are also consideredas references to the imáms.227

The attitude of Shaykh A mad towards the ḥ imáms and hisfree interpretation of certain verses of the Qur’án tosignify their station, significance, and holiness, made himthe target of accusations that he was an Extremist, Ghálí.228

90

91

92

93

IVThe basic Shaykhí eschatological doctrines

Shaykh A mad’s views on eschatological doctrinesḥconstitute his most significant attempt to reconcile reasonand revelation. Such an undertaking was not new in Islamicthought: many scholars before him had tried to reconcileman’s reasoning with the revealed text of the Qur’án and thenarrated Traditions. Shaykh A mad, therefore, sought not toḥwrench reason and revelation into agreement, for some kindof harmony between the two was already thought to exist.His effort was to identify and describe the nature of thatharmony, and he based his doctrine on the belief that theentire universe functions in accordance with certainregulations and in absolute harmony. Reason and revelationare construed as two manifestations of one reality; as such,no conflict could exist between them.

It is true, however, that the exoteric aspect ofcertain Quranic verses and Traditions is not acceptableto the intellect. Shaykh A mad describes such texts asḥunclear (mutashábihát)229 verses, which according to theQur’án are intended to be interpreted.230 Consequently, hisapproach toward eschatological concepts, which are primarilyexpressed in the unclear verses of the Qur’án, is a ration-alistic one, and his interpretation of them allegorical.His approach, however, conflicted with that of thefundamentalist thinkers who accepted only the literal

94

meaning of the verses and disallowed any use of man’sintellectual reasoning to explore other, symbolic, meanings.Shaykh A mad rejected these fundamentalist presentations ofḥeschatological issues in the popular theological books ofthe Shí‘a. In fact, his views on Islamic eschatology arecloser to Abú ‘Alí Síná (d. 428/1038) and Mullá adráṢ(d. 1050/1640), his forerunners in this field. His ration-alistic approach made him an influential reconciler ofreason and revelation in his period. Consequently, theintellectual opposition that he, and later his pupils,encountered was aimed more at his eschatological views thanany other aspect of his thought.

The rationalistic nature of Shaykh A mad’s viewsḥattracted non-fundamentalists who were seeking a reconcilia-tion between reason and revelation. In this respect, theShaykhí school was a religious foundation for theintellectual enlightenment that developed in the latterdecades of the nineteenth century in Iran.

Shaykh A mad’s basic ontological doctrine of theḥabsolute distinction between Possible Being and NecessaryBeing forms the cornerstone for Shaykhí eschatologicalspeculations.

Shaykh A mad maintains that the will is the creativeḥsource and the producer of Possible Being, which consists ofa hierarchy; beginning, at the lowest level, with the realmof matter and ending, at the highest level, with the realmof will. There are seven realms between the realm of matter

95

and the realm of will:

1. The realm of similitudes (‘álam-i mithál), known also asthe realm of intermediary (barzakh, or Havarqalyá)

2. The realm of bodily matter (mawádd-i jismáníya)3. The realm of nature (‘álam-i abí‘atṭ ). This realm is

contained in the realms of intellects (‘álam-i ‘uqúl),spirits (arwáḥ) and souls (nufús), but no separation ordistinction exists among these three

4. The realm of souls (nufús)5. The realm of spirits (‘álam-í arwáb)6. The realm of intellect (‘álam-i ‘uqúl)7. The realm of heart (‘álam-i fu’ád)231

As the realm of Possible Being is produced by the will,any eschatological question which ends up with God, in thepopular Shí‘í view, ends up with the will in the Shaykhview.

The basic eschatological questions which Shaykh A madḥdiscusses are the Day of Judgment and its related issues—Resurrection, Return, Meeting with God, Paradise and Hell,and reward and punishment. The advent of the Mahdí (GuidedOne) is strongly related to eschatological issues, but,since it occupies a special place in Shaykh A mad’s worksḥand played a significant role in the subsequent developmentof the movement, it will be dealt with in a separate chapter.

Before considering Shaykh A mad’s views, it is neces-ḥsary to review the essence of Islamic eschatology as it isrevealed in the Qur’án and expanded in the Traditions.

96

Islamic eschatology holds that the Day of Judgment willdefinitely come, but only God knows when it will occur. Itsadvent will be announced by the appearance of certain signs:“mountains will be like carded wool”; “heaven shall be rentasunder”; “the stars shall be dispersed”; “the seas shall becommingled”; and “the earth and the mountains will be borneaway, and both of them crushed (to dust at a singlecrushing).”232 The Antichrist, al-Dajjál,233 who leads peopleaway from the right path, will appear. The sun will risefrom the west, the Beast will appear, and Gog and Magog234

will come. Dense smoke, which will cover the earth for days,and several eclipses will proclaim the approach of the Dayof Judgment. On that Day, the trumpet will blast twice. Atthe first blast, all living things will die; at the second,the dead will be resurrected. Then they will assemble inthe gathering place, in the presence of God, for Hisjudgment. God will ask them questions, weigh their deedsand then, in accordance with their conduct, send them toHell or to Paradise. One of the major events of that Daywill be the advent of the Mahdí (Guided One), who will befollowed by the return of Christ.

Muslims maintain that the return of all to God and thephysical resurrection promised on the Day of Judgment arethe manifestation of God’s grace to mankind. Belief in thatDay assists man to obey God and prevents him from committingsin. Whoever denies the Return denies the grace of God toHis people.235

97

Shaykh A mad’s attitude toward the Day of Judgmentḥdiffers from the approach of the other Shí‘a. While theShí‘a maintain that on the Day of Judgment being will returnto God, its source, Shaykh Aḥmad believes that the creationwill return to its Possible source (mabda’-i imkání), ratherthan to God, because creation has never come from God,Himself, but from the will. In addition, resurrection willtake place not in the physical body, as the Shí‘í doctrinemaintains, but in another body, which Shaykh Aḥmad callsthe “subtle body” (jasad-i mithálí). The subtle bodyconsists of the elements of the realm of similitudes(‘álam-i mithál), or, in Shaykh A mad’s terminology, theḥHavarqalyá (the realm of the subtle). Since the concept ofthe “subtle body” and the realm of the subtle (Havarqalyá)is a key to Shaykhí eschatological views, it deserves closerattention.

Muḥammad Mu‘ín’s research on the etymology and historyof the term Havarqalyá shows that it is derived from theHebrew term habal qarnaím (Doppelgánger). According to thisderivation, the pronunciation of the term should beHavarqalyá (ھورقليا) as Mu‘ín has suggested.236 Thispronunciation, although the most authentic, is, however,less common. While Shaykh A mad does not mention theḥpronunciation of the term in his works, Mu ammad Tonekáboníḥ(d. 1302/1884), who was very familiar with the Shaykhíideology, in his Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ states that the term shouldbe pronounced Huvarqalyá (ھورقليا).237 Tonekáboní, however,

98

adds that the term is commonly mispronounced HurqalyáHe notes that when he pronounced the term .(ھورقليا)Huvarqalyá (ھورقليا) during a conversation with ájj MulláḤHádí Sabzavárí (d. 1289/1972).238 Sabzavárí pointed out thatthe correct pronunciation was Hurqalyá (ھورقليا), notHuvarqalyá (ھورقليا). Tonekáboní then told Sabzavárí thathe had heard a student of Mullá ‘Alí Núrí239 quote Mullá‘Alí’s statement that Hurqalyá (ھورقليا) was wrong and thatthe correct pronunciation was Huvarqalyá (ھورقليا).240

Today the popular, common pronunciation of this term isHurqalyá (ھورقليا), although it is not correct as far as itsetymological derivation from the Hebrew term is concerned.

Shaykh A mad was not the first to use the termḥHavarqalyá. According to Mu‘ín,241 the term was first usedby Shiháb al-Dín Ya yá b. abaḥ Ḥ sh Sohravardí, known as Shaykhal-Ishráq (d. 587/1191), although the term itself receivedlittle explanation either in the works of Sohravardí or hiscommentators, such as Shams al-Dín Mu ammad b. Ma múdḥ ḥShahzorí and Qu b al-Dín Mu ammad b. Mas‘úd ṭ ḥ Shírází (d. 710/1310). In the works of Sohravardí, the realm of similitudesis described as consisting of an elementary (‘amá irṣ ) realm,within which are Jabursá and Jabulqá, and a celestial(aflák) realm: this celestial realm of similitudes (‘álamaflák al-muthul),242 is called Havarqalyá.

In the works of Shaykh A mad, ḥ Havarqalyá (the realm ofthe subtle) has several connotations and often is usedsynonymously with “the realm of similitudes” (‘álam-i

99

mithál) and “isthmus” (barzakh).

According to Shaykh A mad, ḥ Havarqalyá is a Syriac term243

meaning the next world” (mulk ákhar), located in the eighthclimate (iqlím) and including two cities: Jabursá in thewest and Jabulqá in the east.

Shaykh A mad maintains that the realm of matterḥ(‘álam-i mulk) consists of two levels: the lower level, orthe realm of this earthly world (‘álam al-dunyá), and theupper level, which Shaykh A mad calls ḥ Havarqalyá, or the“second material realm” (‘álam al-mulk al-thání).244 Thus,in this sense Havarqalyá is regarded as a kind of purgator-ial realm or isthmus (barzakh), which is an intermediarybetween this material world (‘álam-i mulk) and the next,spiritual, world (‘álam-i malakút). Shaykh A mad conceivedḥof such an intermediate realm because he believed that sincespirit is pure spirit and the physical body is pure matter,there should be another realm between the two, which isneither one nor the other.245 The elements of the Havarqalyáare described as having less density than the temporalelements that make up the material world, yet more densitythan pure spirit. This intermediary realm is the source ofthe second body of man, which will survive death andexperience resurrection.

Shaykh A mad maintains that man has two bodies: first,ḥthe material body consisting of physical elements—water,earth, air, and fire—which dissolves in the grave and doesnot became resurrected at all; and second, the subtle body,

100

which will endure after the physical body has crumbled todust.246 It is the subtle body that will be resurrected onthe Day of Judgment. The subtle body does not decomposebecause it consists of elements of the realm of similitudes(‘álam-i mithál), or the Havarqalyá (the realm of thesubtle).

Regarding the functions and characteristics of thesubtle body, Shaykh A mad states that a “true man” consistsḥof intellect (‘aql), soul (nafs), nature ( abí‘atṭ ), matter(mádda) and subtle (mithál). Intellect is in soul, andsoul is in nature, and all three—intellect, soul, andnature—are in matter. But the existence of matter isdependent upon the subtle body. Only when the subtle clingsto matter, does a body (al-jism al-a líṣ ) come into being.247

Shaykh A mad describes the first external body (ḥ al-jasadal-awwal al- áhiríẓ ) as a “shell” made of earth, air, fire,and water, while the second body (al-jasad al-thání) is amore delicate internal substance, like a pearl, made ofsubtle elements which are hidden in matter, i.e., the shell.After death, matter remains in the grave and its externalappearance perishes. But its internal substance, which issubtle, survives. This internal substance is the secondbody, made of the Havarqalyá’s elements.

In one of Sayyid Ká im’s works, the concept of theẓsubtle body occurs, but clothed in another term: “essentialelement”. When Sayyid Ká im was asked how God would bringẓback the dead when they had been consumed by worms in their

101

graves, Sayyid Ká im answered that a thing consists ofẓ“essence” and “accident”. The being of a thing dependsprimarily upon its essence. Man, accordingly, consists ofaccidental elements, which will be consumed by worms, andessential elements, which cannot perish or be destroyed.That element which will be resurrected on the Day ofJudgment is the essential element, which survives afterdeath, and is so subtle that it is not visible.248 TheReturn, therefore, will be in the essential element and notthe accidental. Although in his explanation Sayyid Ká imẓuses “essential element” and not “spirit”, as opposed to“elementary element” or “body”, throughout his descriptionit is well understood that by the term “essential element”he refers to man’s spirit. This speculation is supported inanother treatise Sayyid Ká im wrote for Mullá Muqím Qazvíní,ẓin which nafs-i ná iqaṭ 249 is used for “essential element”.In this work he says that the reality of man is in hisspirit (nafs-i ná iqaṭ ) and not in his body. During his life,Sayyid Ká im says, a person goes through the stages ofẓchildhood, adolescence, and old age. Through this process,many physical changes happen in his body, but his reality,which is his spirit, remains the same and does not changephysically. He points out that some scholars, such as Mullá

adrá, maintain that return of the body, as a religiousṢdogma, is a fact and should be accepted, although intellectfails to prove it. Sayyid Ká im then remarks that God hasẓgiven us two proofs through which the truth is revealed:

102

external proofs, such as the prophets, and internal proofs,such as man’s intellect. These two kinds of proofs are inharmony and go together. Whatever a religion establishes,the intellect accepts as true. Therefore, it is not permis-sible to attempt to prove what is established by the divinedecree, if the intellect does not testify to its righteous-ness.250

In answering the question of Ká im b. ‘Alí Naqí al-ẓSuhá’í on the nature of the relationship between letters,attributes of God, and creation, Shaykh A mad outlinesḥanother aspect of the concept of the “realm of the subtle”.He states that the “limited being” (wujúd al-muqayyad),which begins with the First Intellect and ends up withearth, consists of twenty-eight stages, each of whichcorresponds to an attribute of God as well as a letter ofthe Arabic alphabet as shown in Table 1.251

Table 11 Intellect (‘aql) The Incomparable

(al-badí‘)ا

2 Soul (nafs) The Resurrector(al-bá‘ith)

ب

3 Nature ( abi‘atṭ ) The Hidden(al-bá inṭ )

ج

4 Matter (mádda) The Last(al-ákhir)

د

5 Subtle (mithál) The Manifest(al- áhirẓ )

هـ

6 The Universal Substance(jism al-kull)

The wise(al- akímḥ )

و

103

7 The Heaven(al-‘arsh)

The All-Encompassing(al-mu iḥ ṭ)

ز

8 The Throne(al-kursí)

The Appreciative(al-shakúr)

ح9 The Celestial Spheres

(falak al-burúj)The Self-Sufficient(ghaní al-dahr)

ظ10 The Celestial Stations

(falak al-manázil)The Powerful(al-muqtadir)

ى11 The Sphere of Saturn

(falak al-zuḥal)The Lord(al-rabb)

ن12 The Sphere of Jupiter

(falak al-mushtarí)The All-Knowing(al-‘álim)

ل13 The Sphere of Mars

(falak al-mirrikh)The Subduer(al-qáhir)

م14 The Sphere of the Sun

(falak al-shams)The Light(al-núr)

ن15 The Sphere of Venus

(falak al-zuhrah)The Fashioner(al-muṣawwir)

س16 The Sphere of Mercury

(falak ‘uṭárid)The Counter(al-muḥṣíy)

ع17 The Sphere of the Moon

(falak al-qamar)The Evident(al-mubín)

ف18 The Ethereal Globe

(kura al-athíríy)The Restrainer(al-qábiḍ)

ش19 The Atmospheric Globe

(kura al-hawá)The Alive(al-ḥayy)

ق20 The Water Globe

(kura al-má’)The Quickener(al-muḥyí)

ر21 The Earth Globe

(kura al-turáb)The Creator of Death(al-mumít)

ش22 Mineral

(al-jamád)The Mighty(al-‘azíz)

ت23 Vegetation

(nabát)The Provider(al-ráziq)

ث24 Animal

(al-ḥayawán)The Dishonorer(al-mudhill)

خ

104

25 Angel(al-malak)

The Strong(al-qawíyy)

ذ26 Jinn

(al-jinn)The Gracious(al-la ífṭ )

ض27 Man

(al-insán)The Gatherer(al-jámi‘)

ظ28 The Comprehensive

Stage(martabat al-jámi‘)

The One Who is Ex-alted in Rank(rafí‘ al-daraját)

غ

The realm of the subtle is the fifth rank whichcorresponds to God’s attribute, “Manifest” (al- áhirẓ ) andthe letter “h” (ه). The location of the realm of thesubtle, in this explanation, is between the realm of matter(mádda) and the realm of the universal substance (jism al-kull). The location of the subtle realm in this schema,however, differs from another schema that Shaykh A mad hasḥpresented on the realms of the universe. According to theother schema, the universe consists of six realms, namely:

1. Intellects (‘uqúl), substances free from any physicalelement or form

2. Souls (nufús), the words of the Preserved Tablet3. Natures ( abáyiṭ ‘), the realm of concrete individuals4. The Realm of Jewel, or technical substances, referring

to the atoms of atmosphere5. The Realm of the Subtle, the forms in the atmosphere of

the barzakh, between the malakút and the mulk, locatedbetween the non-material realm and the realm of time (thematerial)

105

6. The Realm of Material Bodies, which consists of elemen-tary matter (al-mawádd al-‘un uríyaṣ ) and the subtleforms (al- uwar al-miṣ thálíya) which Shaykh A mad under-ḥstands from the realm of subtle, in this context, asthe realm of image of substance ( uwar al-ṣ dhát), andthat is the image of existence and its origin.252

According to this theory, a man is made of matter(al-mádda) and image (al- uraṣ ). The relationship betweenthe matter and the image can be likened to a man in front ofa mirror. The matter is like the mirror and the image islike a picture in the mirror.253 The relationship betweenthe realm of mithál to this world is like the relationshipbetween the sun and the earth. The sun manifests itself inthe earth without descending to earth or entering into it.The sun is always in a fixed position, but its radiance ismanifested on the different objects on the earth.

The subtle realm, therefore, is like the image that onecan see in the mirror. The subtle realm is beyond thelimitation of the material world. What man sees in hisdream, which is the image, is the subtle realm.254

If we, hypothetically, imagine that the realm of the sub-tle, like this material realm, has an earth and a heaven, Jáb-ulqá and Jábursá would be its earth and Havarqalvá its heaven.

The concept of the subtle body is not only used toexplain the resurrection of bodies on the Day of Judgment,it has also been used to discuss the Night Journey and theAscension of the Prophet Muḥammad to heaven. On the basis

106

of the Quranic verses, it is commonly held that the Prophetwas carried from the “Sacred Mosque” of Mecca to the “RemoteMosque” of Jerusalem at night (isrá, night journey). FromJerusalem the Prophet ascended to the “Lote-Tree” (sidratal-muntahá) and then was carried to the “measure of two bowsor closer still” (qaba qawsayn aw adná).255

The exoteric meanings of this occurrence as given inthe Qur’án and Islamic Traditions, and as they are under-stood by the Muslims, are: (1) the Prophet ascended beyondthe material realm and (2) the Ascension took place with thematerial body of the Prophet. However, the Shaykhís explainthat the Ascension took place within the Possible Being andthat Muḥammad did not ascend beyond the Possible realm.Since, according to Shaykhí thought, the Prophet had comefrom the “First Manifestation” (tajallí-i awwal) or the“Divine Soul” (nafs-i ra máníḥ ), the destination of hisAscension was this same source, which is located within therealm of Possible.256 The Shaykhís believe that the “measureof two bows” (qába qawsayn) and the station of “closerstill” (aw adná), the highest point of the Ascension, arestill within the Possible realm.257 Shaykh A mad, in con-ḥtrast with the popular Muslim theologians’ view, maintainsthat the Ascension took place not with the physical body ofthe Prophet, but with his subtle body.

Regarding Hell and Paradise, Shaykhís hold that thereare two paradises: a worldly paradise (behesht-i dunyá) anda Paradise in the hereafter (behesht-i ákhirat). After

107

separation from the body, the spirits of the believers, itis believed, will remain in the first, worldly paradiseuntil the blast of the trumpet. This paradise is describedin the Qur’án as, “the gardens (jannát) of perpetuity, whichthe Beneficent God has promised to His servants whileunseen; surely His promise shall come to pass. They shallnot hear therein any vain discourse, but only ‘Peace’, andthey shall have their sustenance therein morning andevening.” (19:61–62). This verse, Shaykh A mad believes,ḥrefers to the world’s paradise, because “morning” and“evening”, which are mentioned in this verse, are found inthis world and not in the hereafter, which is timeless.Following the above verse, the Qur’án reads, “This is thegarden [al-jannat] which We cause those of Our servants toinherit who guard (against evil).” (19:63). This verse,according to Shaykh A amad, refers to the paradise of theḥhereafter.258

According to Shaykhí eschatological views, hell is alsoof two kinds: there is a hell both in this world and in thehereafter. The Qur’án refers to the world’s hell in versessuch as: “So Allah protected him from the evil (conse-quences) of what they planned, and the most evil chastise-ment overtook Pharaoh’s people: The fire; they shall bebrought before it (every) morning and evening ….”(40:45–46).

The sane argument is applied here that this verserefers to this world’s hell because time is not applicable

108

in the hereafter. The rest of the verse, however, refers tothe hereafter’s hell; it reads, “And on the day when thehour shall come to pass: Make Pharaoh’s people enter theseverest chastisement.” (40:46) This verse refers to theseverest chastisement of the fire in the hell of thehereafter.259

A common Muslim belief is that on the Day of Judgmentman will see or meet with God. This concept is found inmany verses of the Qur’án. For example: “They are losersindeed who reject the meeting of Allah: until when the hourcomes upon them all of a sudden they shall say; ‘Our grieffor our neglecting it.’” (6:31) Another verse says, “Theywill perish indeed who called the meeting with Allah to be alie, and they are not followers of the right direction.”(10:45) And also it says, “He regulates the affair, makingclear the communications that you may be certain of meetingyour Lord.” (13:2)

The concept of a meeting with God is one of the mostcontroversial issues in Islamic theology. On the basis ofthe Quranic verse which reads, “Vision comprehends Him not,and He comprehends (all) vision ….” (6:104), some scholarsbelieve that a meeting with God is impossible for man. They,therefore, take the verses which refer to meeting Godallegorically, not literally. Another group of scholarsbelieve that a meeting with God will surely occur. Theyassert that if such a meeting were impossible, Moses wouldnot have asked for it. According to the Qur’án, Moses said

109

to God, “My Lords show me (Thyself), so that I may look uponThee.” (7:143) Although God replied, “You cannot (bear to)see Me,” (7:143), the fact that Moses made this requestindicates the possibility of such a meeting. In addition.although it was not possible for Moses to see God at thattime, according to the Quranic verses, God will show Himselfon the Day of Judgment. Thus, the negative answer thatMoses received was for that time only, not forever.

Shaykh A mad, however, rejects the traditional, literalḥinterpretation of such a meeting with God on the basis ofhis ontological principle that the Essence of God is beyondthe reach of Possible Being. He interprets the meeting withGod described in the Qur’án as “seeing” God with the heart.Seeing God would not be visually beholding God’s Essence.but rather seeing God’s manifestation. This is possiblewhen man’s heart has faith in Him, His actions, works, andteachings. If one obeys the commands of God and observesHis prohibitions, God will remove the veil from his eyes andthen he will be able to recognize God’s will at work.260

As for seeing God on the Day of Judgment, Shaykh A madḥhas another interpretation. As previously stated, on thebasis of Islamic Traditions, Shaykh A mad interprets the Dayḥof Judgment as the Day of the advent of the expected Qá’im.This interpretation, although based on Traditions, isradically different from the common Muslim belief. In theusual Muslim concept of the Day of Judgment, this Day isexpected to alter the entire universe, bringing drastic

110

revolutions, changes, and the transformation of the veryphenomenon of life on earth. In the Day of Judgment asunderstood by Shaykh A mad, revolutions, changes, andḥtransformations will take place, but not in the way thatpeople literally understand from the text.

In this interpretation of the Day of Judgment, ShaykhAḥmad attempts to reconcile intellect and revelation. Theuniverse will not come to an end on the Day of Judgment; ithas always existed and will continue to exist forever. Whatthe Day of Judgment truly means is the Day of advent of anew manifestation of God which puts an end to the course ofits previous dispensation and opens a new cycle for humanbeings. As the Day of the advent of the expected Qá’im, theDay of Judgment will bring about changes in the social,moral, and religious life of the people; the values thathave been applied for centuries will change, the principlesand teachings of the previous religion will change, and aprofound revolution will take place in all the variousaspects of man’s activities.

Shaykh A mad’s interpretation of the Day of Judgment isḥfounded on the many Traditions on the authority of Shí‘íimáms which interpret the Quranic verses on this subject asreferring to the day of the advent of the Qá’im.261 Forexample, one Quranic verse says, “The hour [the Day ofJudgment] drew nigh”. (54:1). A Tradition interprets theverse as the advent of the Qá’im.262 Another Quranic verserefers to one of the signs of the Day of Judgment by saying

111

“For when the trumpret is sounded ….” (74:8). ATradition regards the verse as referring to the Hidden Imám,i.e., the Qá’im.263 Another verse in the Qur’án reads, “Andcertainly We sent Moses with Our communications, saying:Bring forth your people from utter darkness into light andremind them of the days of Allah.” (14:5). A Tradition tellsus that “the days of Allah” is not only the Day of Judgment,but can also be thought of as the day of the Qá’ím (yaum al-qá’im) and also the day of death (yaum al-maut).264 Thesefew Traditions, the essence of which is found in numerousothers, provide the basis for interpreting the Quranicverses on the Day of Judgment as indicating the advent ofthe Qá’im. This is exactly what Shaykh Aḥmad has done.

As reward or punishment is expected to be meted out onthe traditional Day of Judgment, according to Shaykhíinterpretation, reward and punishment will be given topeople on the Day of the advent of the Qá’im. For those whosucceed in recognizing him, that act of recognition itselfwill be their reward; and for those who fail to recognizehim, that failure shall be their punishment. Therefore, torecognize the expected Qá’im is to enter paradise, and to bedeprived of his recognition is hell. Moreover, the bridge( iráṢ ṭ) referred to in the texts will not be the familiarbridge between hell and paradise, but is a symbol of theQá’im‘s teachings, principles, and doctrines. Shaykh Aḥmad,in a treatise known as Qa ífíyaṭ , says that iráṢ ṭ is the wayfrom God to His creation and His creation’s way to Him. The

112

“way” is a symbol which stands for the imám, his friendship,this teachings, and the recognition of himself.265

Sayyid Ká im, in a treatise written for a certain Mulláẓusayn ‘Alí, says that the Ḥ iráṢ ṭ is of two kinds; one is in

this world and one is in the hereafter. The irá Ṣ ṭ is a waywhich God has provided to assist His creation and is a waythrough which God can answer His creation’s request forassistance. The iráṢ ṭ is a channel which connects God withHis creation, and vice versa. This way is the way ofReligion, which is the way between His action and Hiscreation.266 The irá Ṣ ṭ is also those deeds which are theresult of man’s recognition of the Prophet and obedience toHis teachings, and by which he can enter Paradise.267

Shaykh A mad’s approach towards the basic Islamicḥeschatological doctrines focuses on reconciliation betweenreason and revelation. To achieve this goal, he uses twotactics. First, he appeals to his ontological base whichholds that no connection can be conceived between the realmof Possible Being and the realm of the Necessary Being, andconsequently, any eschatological doctrine that, in theorthodox Shí‘í view, ends up with God, should, in his view,and up with the Will. Second, he maintains that if theResurrection and Return are going to occur, they willhappen with the subtle body and not with the physical body,contrary to popular doctrine. Finally, he suggests that theDay of Judgment can be thought of as the Day of the adventof the Qá’im, on which all signs of the Day of Judgment

113

would be fulfilled allegorically.

114

115

116

VDevelopments in the Shaykhí school after

the death of Shaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥThe death of Shaykh A mad A sá’í in 1241/1827 did notḥ ḥ

result in a struggle for succession, for it was widely knownwithin his circle as well as outside that Sayyid Ká imẓRashtí was to be his successor. Once when Shaykh A mad hadḥbeen asked who should be the authority after him, he repliedthat Sayyid Ká im was the one.ẓ 268 Shaykh A mad called SayyidḥRá im “My Son” (ẓ waladí).269 Indeed, one commentator has goneso far as to describe Sayyid Kázim as the shining apple ofhis [Shaykh A mad’s] eye and the splendid bright strength ofḥhis heart, his companion in his hardships and troubles, andhe who was like the shirt on his back.”270

Sayyid Ká im’s intellectual and scholastic relationshipẓwith Shaykh A mad, his indisputable authority in Islamicḥliterature in general and Shaykh A mad’s writings andḥthoughts in particular, and his piety and faithfulness madehim the only one intellectually worthy and scholasticallycapable to lead the Shaykhí school.

Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí b. Qásim b. A mad b. abíb was bornḥ Ḥin 1212/1798271 in Rasht in the Province of Gílán. His familywas reputed to have been descended from the Prophet andtraced its origin to Medina. After Sayyid abíb’s death,Ḥhis son, Sayyid A mad, emigrated to Raḥ sht, where his sonQásim, and then Sayyid Ká im, were born.ẓ 272

117

Little is known about Sayyid Ka im’s childhood exceptẓthat in his early years, in his home town, he received atraditional religious education. He studied Islamicsciences and memorized the Qur’án.

When he was a young man he had a dream in which Fá ima,ṭthe daughter of the Prophet, advised him to go to Yazd tomeet with Shaykh A mad A sá’í, who was residing there at theḥ ḥtime. Acting upon this vision, Sayyid Ká im went to Yazd inẓ1231/1815 when he was about 20 years old and met with ShaykhA mad. This was the beginning of his scholastic career.ḥFor about ten years, until Shaykh A mad’s death in 1241/1825,ḥSayyid Kim studied with him, accompanied him on hisjourneys, and was his closest assistant. Although ShaykhAḥmad was his main teacher, Sayyid Ká im had the opportunityẓto study with several other learned men of his time such asSayyid ‘Abd Alláh Shubbar (d. 1242/1826), Mullá ‘Alí Rashtí,and Shaykh Músá Najafí (d. 1241/1825).273 Of his teachers,however, he most respected and admired Shaykh A mad. ToḥSayyid Ká ím, ẓ Shaykh A mad was not merely a teacher but aḥspiritual leader, a sympathetic companion, and a kindguardian who looked after him with tender care. Throughthis relationship, Sayyid Ká im not only acquired theẓdoctrinal beliefs of Shaykh A mad, but also the ḥ Shaykh’sattitudes and world view.

The ministry of Sayyid Ká im, which officially began inẓ1241/1825, was in fact an extension of Shaykh A mad’sḥauthority and influence. By this it is not implied that

118

Sayyid Ká im’s contribution was any the less, for it wasẓSayyid Ká im’s creativity that brought ẓ Shaykh Aḥmad’s thoughtinto its full measure of elaboration.

During Sayyid Ká ím’s ministry, the ẓ Shaykhís developedan increasing sense of solidarity. Although the Shaykhíschool did not operate independently of the Shí‘a, itsunique features, which were only partly evident toward theend of the time of Shaykh A mad, were becoming crystallized.ḥIt was at this time, too, that Shaykh A mad’s doctrinesḥreceived full elaboration and further explanation in theworks of Sayyid Ká im, which occurred partly as a result ofẓseveral scholastic-confrontations that Sayyid Ká im had inẓKarbalá with some of the leading religious authorities ofthe time. These confrontations brought out the uniquecharacteristics of Shaykhí doctrines and the points ofdisagreement with other trends of thought.

Sayyid Ká im’s most important confrontation took placeẓin Karbalá at a meeting with three distinguished U úlíṣscholars: Sayyid Mahdí b. Sayyid ‘Alí abá abá’í (d. 1260/Ṭ ṭ1844), Mu ammad Ja‘far Astarábádí (d. 1263/1847), andḥMu ammad ḥ Sharíf b. Mullá asan ‘Alí Mázandarání, known asḤSharíf al-‘Ulamá (d. 1245/1829).274 The meeting, held at therequest of Sayyid Mahdí abá abá’í, was called to examineṬ ṭthe Shaykhí views on theological questions such as theReturn, the Ascension of the Prophet, and the status of theimáms.275 In this meeting, Sayyid Ká im admitted that some ofẓShaykh A mad’s writings appeared to contradict popular ḥ Shí‘í

119

beliefs. Upon this admission, abá abá’í, with the coopera-Ṭ ṭtion of his colleagues, issued a takfír to the effect thatShaykhís were heretics. Later, Mullá Mu ammad Ja‘farḥAstarábádí, one of the participants in that meeting, wrote abook rejecting the Shaykhí ideology.276 This takfír wasfollowed by others issued by authorities such as Mullá ÁqáDarbandí (d. 1286/1869); Shaykh Mu ammad usayn b. Mu ammadḥ Ḥ ḥRa ím (d. 1250/1834), the author of ḥ al-Fu úl al-ṣGharawíya fi al-U úl al-Fiqhíya;ṣ and Shaykh Mu ammad asanḥ Ḥb. Báqir Najafí (d. 1266 or 1268/1844), author of theJawáhir al-Kalám fí Shar ḥ Sharáyi‘ al-Islám.277

On another occasion in Karablá, a confrontation tookplace with Mírzá Mu ammad asan, the son of the well-knownḥ Ḥphilosopher and student of Mullá adrá’s philosophy, MulláṢ‘Alí Núrí (d. 1246/1830). The subject was the concept ofbasí al- aqíqaṭ ḥ , to which the opposition of Shaykh A mad wasḥwell known. Although the concept was a major point ofdisagreement between the Shaykh and Mullá adrá, it isṢreported that when Mu ammad asan, who was a representativeḥ Ḥof Mullá adrá’s school, explained adrá’s stand on theṢ Ṣsubject, Sayyid Ká im did not have any objection.ẓ 278

The outcome of such frequent confrontations withrepresentatives of different trends of thought was not, ofcourse, always favorable for the Shaykhís, but the effect ofsuch confrontations was to increase solidarity and toadvance a sense of identity among the Shaykhís, who came tosee themselves as distinct from the rest of the Shí‘a in

120

thought, approach, and behavior. The confrontationsintensified the enmity and hatred between the two parties.They also brought the Shaykhí school wider recognition andattracted to it students who were seeking a new approachtoward religious questions. Confrontations also demon-strated that the Shaykhí ideology was a threat to theauthority and power of the ‘ulamá and the popularly heldbeliefs of the Shí‘a.

The very fact that these discussions took place,regardless of the outcome, reveals that in Karbalá the Shí‘ì‘ulamá regarded the Shaykhís as a group against which theyhad to take measures in the name of protection of theSharí‘a. There is no doubt that they recognized in Shaykhíideas a potential threat to their own authority and position.

The Shaykhí school at the time of Sayyid Ká im becameẓan active force for anti-traditionalists, who regarded it asa revolutionary movement against the religious authoritiesand their dogmas. The revolutionary force of the movement,now only in its religious embryonic form, would develop inlater decades into a mature religious and socio-politicalrevolution.

The intellectual result of the confrontations appearedin several apologetical and polemical works issuing fromboth parties.

121

Sayyid Ká im’s worksẓSayyid Ká im’s works were primarily written in the formẓ

of a risála (treatise) in answer to the religious questionsof his students, followers, religious authorities, andstatesmen. The questions they asked were numerous andtouched on a vast range of subjects, from daily juridicalproblems to theology and philosophy, and even Freemasonry inthe west. A single treatise night cover a few or as many aseighty questions in different fields.279

Sayyid Ká im also wrote commentaries on Quranic versesẓor phrases, on Traditions on the authority of the Prophetand the imáms, and on the works of his predecessors, such asMullá Mu sin Fay or ḥ ḍ Shaykh A mad A sá’í. Besides writingḥ ḥcommentaries on Shaykh A mad’s works, Sayyid Ká im trans-ḥ ẓlated Shaykh A mad’s ḥ ayát al-NafsḤ and Risála-i aydaríyaḤinto Persian as well as a few sections of the Sharḥal-Ziyára.

Sayyid Ká im states clearly that his ideology derivesẓfrom Shaykh A mad A sá’í’s and his knowledge comes from himḥ ḥas well.280 Although this statement may have traces ofhumility, it is nonetheless a fact that his writings are anobvious extension of those of Shaykh A mad A sá’í. Even aḥ ḥglance at Sayyid Ká im’s works reveals that he was deeplyẓinfluenced by the methodology, terminology, and generalapproach of Shaykh A mad.ḥ

Sayyid Ká im wrote extensively. He himself gives aẓ

122

list of 138 works at the end of his Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ .281

Nicolas, in Essai Sur Le Chéikhisme, lists 135 works;282

Habíbábádí, in the Makárim al-Áthár, lists 60;283 and Mudarris,in Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , mentions that Sayyid Ká im wrote 150ẓworks.284 The most complete and comprehensive list of SayyidKá im’s works, however, is provided by Ibráhímí, who devotesẓthe second chapter of the second volume of the Fihrist285

entirely to them. In this chapter, he lists about 170 worksunder the following headings:

1. Works on divine theology and virtues2. Works on doctrines and rejection of his opponents’

views3. Works on mysticism4. Works on principles of fiqh5. Works on fiqh6. Commentaries7. Works answering various questions286

The language of Sayyid Ká im, like that of his teacherẓShaykh A mad, is not easy to understand. Technical terms,ḥallegorical expressions, and extensive gnostic terminologycontribute to this difficulty. Indeed, the author of theA san al-Wadí‘aḥ , Mu ammad Mahdi Músawí, remarks that no oneḥcan understand his works. He goes on to state sarcasticallythat Sayyid Ká im has written in Hindi.ẓ 287

While Shaykh A mad wrote exclusively in Arabic, SayyidḥKá im wrote some works in Persian, although his major booksẓare entirely in Arabic. Three of his most important books

123

are considered in greater detail.

1. Shar al-ḥ Khu bat al- utunjíyaṭ ṬThis is a commentary on a sermon delivered by ‘Alí b. Abí

álib between Kufa and Medina. Ṭ Nahj al-Balágha does notcontain this sermon, but it is recorded in al-Majmú‘ al-Rá’iq288 and Shaykh Rajab al- áfi al-Bursí’s Ḥ ẓ Masháriq Anwáral-Yaqín.289 Sayyid Ká im wrote the commentary, whichẓexceeds 350 pages, in 1232/1816 at the request of certain‘ulamá, whose names are not mentioned. Sayyid Ká im in hisẓDalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ states that his commentary on

utunjíyaṬ contains divine secrets that only a pure-heartedand enlightened person could bear to understand.290 Theversion of ‘Alí’s sermon he has used is that quoted byShaykh Rajab al- áfi al-Bursí.Ḥ ẓ 291 In his commentary, SayyidKá im quotes the sermon phrase by phrase and follows eachẓquotation with an elaborate interpretation. The commentarycontains detailed a discussion of eschatological andontological issues as treated by Muslim scholars.

2. Shar al-Qa ídat al-Lámíyaḥ ṣThe Qa ídat al-Lámíyaṣ was written by ‘Abd al-Báqí Afandí al-

Mú ilíṣ 292 in praise of Imám Músá al-Ká im.ẓ 293 Sayyid Ká imẓwrote his commentary on the Qa ídaṣ in 1258/1842 at therequest of ‘Alí Ri á Paḍ shá, the governor of Baghdád. Sharḥal-Qa ídaṣ is Sayyid Ká im’s major work on broad Islamicẓtheological perspectives.294

3. Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥThis work was written to explain Shaykhí views and to defend

124

Shaykhí ideology against the attacks of the ‘ulamá. Thebook contains a biography of Shaykh A mad A sá’í, excerptsḥ ḥfrom his ijázas, and comments on his character, hisachievements, and the hardships he suffered during his life.Sayyid Ká im explains points of dispute between the ẓ Shaykhísand the Shí‘a and records in detail his confrontations withthe ‘ulamá. At the end of the book, he lists the works ofthe Shaykh and then his own works, with a few words ofdescription about each.

Sayyid Ká im, in addition to writing religiousẓtreatises, educated hundreds of students, many of whombecame leading authorities on religion and participatedactively in social and religious struggles after he died.The Makárim al-Áthár gives the names of several of SayyidKá im’s students,ẓ 295 among whom are ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ KhánKermání, the great Persian poetess Qurrat al-‘Ain, Mullá

usayn BoḤ shro’í, and Shaykh ‘Alí Torshízí. All becameinfluential and distinguished leaders in the later develop-ments of the Shaykhí school.

Unfortunately, Sayyid Ká im did not live long enough toẓwitness the results of his achievements. He was forty-sevenyears old when he became ill, or was poisoned,296 and died on11 Dhí al- ijja 1259/1843Ḥ 297 in Karbalá.

He was survived by three children, a girl and two boys.The most distinguished of them was Sayyid A mad, who wasḥkilled in 1295/1878 in ‘Atabát.298

Inspired and energetic, Sayyid Ká im played such anẓ

125

important role in the Shaykhí school that, when he died,the movement that Shaykh A mad had initiated, and whichḥSayyid Ká im had organized, disintegrated almost immediately.ẓHis death, in fact, marked the beginning of a serious crisisamong his followers. The crisis centered on the issue ofsuccessorship, for Sayyid Ká im had not appointed anyone asẓhis successor, and this created disunity in his circle.

The disunity that appeared among the Shaykhís in thisperiod not only prevented the movement from any furthersignificant extension in size, but also weakened the solid-arity of the school. This weakness, in turn, paved the wayfor serious attacks of the Shí‘a on the Shaykhís.

The headquarters of the movement which had beenestablished in Karbala at the time of Shaykh A mad and hadḥattracted hundreds of religious students at the time ofSayyid Ká im, now moved out of Karbalá and new centers wereẓestablished in Kermán and Ádharbáyján. They attracted fewerstudents in general, and far fewer students from the Arablands. The new centers also lacked the scholarly reputationthat Karbalá had possessed at the time of Sayyid Ká im. Asẓlong as the Shaykhí school was based in Karbalá, the centerfor Shí‘í scholarship, it had a direct connection with otherIslamic trends of thought, but the relocation of theShaykhís to Iran removed them from this direct contact withthe mainstream. The Shí‘a who considered the Shaykhísheretics, may well have viewed this move out of Karbala as avictory.

126

The transfer to Iran also brought about an importantchange in the literature of the school: while ShaykhA mad had written his works entirely in Arabic and SayyidḥKá im wrote only a few books in Persian, the new ẓ Shaykhíleaders now gradually began to write primarily in Persianand for a largely non-Arab audience. The works of theseleaders did little more than review the Shaykhí ideology asformulated in the works of Shaykh Aḥmad and elaborated inthe works of Sayyid Ká im. There is nothing in their worksẓto compare with the originality and significance of thewritings of Shaykh Aḥmad and Sayyid Ká im.ẓ

The most important of the drastic changes whichafflicted the school after the death of Sayyid Ká im wasẓthe lack of accepted leadership, which resulted in faction-alism within the school. In his will,299 Sayyid Ká im doesẓnot mention a successor. However, he repeatedly emphasizestwo major points: the importance of unity among hisfollowers and the advent of the one whom Sayyid Ká im termsẓthe “Sign of God” (Áyat Alláh) and the “Proof of God”( ujjat AlláhḤ ).300 In addition, he advises his followers inthese words:

To awaken from the sleep of ignorance. Today isthe day of examination and clarification. In sucha day, one should hold on to the firmest handle,and beseech God that all gather together on theDay of Gathering301 [that is, the Day of Judgment]and disunity does not occur among you ….302

Be careful not to take too much pride in yourmaterial possessions. On that day, he who ishumble will be raised and he who is nighty willbe lowered ….303 In each period [‘a rṣ ] heremust be a Protector [walí] who carries out the

127

affairs of religion …. He [the walí] is theSign of God and the Proof of God …. Earlierhe came to you and taught you what you did notknow ….304 There, undoubtedly, must be theappearance of Sign after Sign in every period….305 Hold fast to the covenant of God and layhold on the firmest handle,306 ask for successand guidance from God …. I beseech you toavoid disunity, because disunity cuts the treeof unity; it uproots the word of harmony andaccord; it destroys the foundations of prophet-hood [nubuwwat]; and it shakes the pillars ofsuccessorship [wiláyat].307

The fact that Sayyid Ká im did not appoint anyone asẓhis successor, and the fact that he urged his followers toseek the walí, indicates that Sayyid Ká im believed that theẓadvent of the walí was imminent, thus there was no need toappoint a successor. Without an appointed successor, andwith no student who could win general acceptance within hiscircle, as had been the case after the death of Shaykh A mad,ḥdisputes arose and various claimants to the successionappeared. Among them two distinguished students of SayyidKá im were most prominent: ájj Mu ammad Karím ẓ Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání(d. 1288/1871) and ájj Mirzá Ḥ Shafí‘ Tabrízí.

It should be noted that the ideological viewpoint whichresulted in the division of the followers of Sayyid Ká imẓinto two groups had to do primarily with the type ofleadership that each group sought. While ájj MuḤ ḥammadKarím Khán Kermání believed in individual leadership, ájjḤMírzá Shafí‘ believed in ijtihád. This meant that ájjḤMu ammad Karím ḥ Khán claimed, and was accepted by hisfollowers, to be the only individual leader of the Shaykhíswhose ideas were legitimized, whereas Mírzá Shafí‘ believed

128

that the Shaykhís should follow the principles of ShaykhA mad and Sayyid Ká im but for daily religious questions,ḥ ẓshould follow the examples of the Shí‘í recognized mujtahidsof their time.

It was about five months after the death of SayyidKá im, on 5 Jumádá al-Ulá 1260/1844, that Sayyid ‘AlíẓMu ammad ḥ Shirází declared himself to be the Báb (Gate) tothe advent of the Qá’im. Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad’s claim wasḥnot connected with the crises of succession within theShaykhí school, but since he had attended Sayyid Ká im’sẓcircle,308 and the advent of the Qá’im was predicted in theShaykhí writings,309 the claim of the Báb attracted manystudents of the Shaykhí school, who became known as Bábís.310

The two groups of Shaykhís that emerged following thedeath of Sayyid Ká im, however, were to have a much differ-ẓent relationship with the Bábí movement, opposing the claimsof the Báb and even actively participating in efforts tocrush the nascent movement.

ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermáníand the Shaykhís of Kermán

The student of Sayyid Ká im who won the largest numberẓof supporters was ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání.311 Hewas the son of Mu ammad Ibráhím ḥ Khán ahír al-Dawla, theẒgovernor of Kermán and cousin of Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh.

Mu ammad Karím ḥ Khán was born in 1225/1810 to a rich

129

family in Kermán.312 He received his elementary education inthe city of his birth and was a young man when he met acertain ájj Ismá‘íl,Ḥ 313 one of Sayyid Ká im’s students.ẓDuring this meeting, he learned about the Shaykhí school andbecame so attracted to it that he went to Karbalá and metSayyid Ká im. He remained there for eight monthsẓ 314 andattended Sayyid Ka im’s circle. Then he returned to Kermán.ẓAfter four years he made another trip to Karbalá, where hestayed for two years.315 It was on his way back to Kermánthat he claimed to be the successor of Sayyid Ká im and theẓleader of the school. Except for a few trips to Tehrán and Mashhad,he spent most of his time in Kermán teaching, preaching, andwriting books. In 1288/1871, as he was on his way toKarbalá, he died in Tahrod, a village near Kermán. Hisbody, after remaining in Langar for one and half years, wascarried to Karbalá and buried there.

The majority of the Shaykhís in Kermán accepted ájjḤMu ammad Karím ḥ Khán as the legitimate leader of the schoolafter Sayyid Ká im. He considered himself as an inspiredẓleader who was acting in accordance with divine guidance,316

but his authority was based on the loyalty of his followers,mainly the members of his family located in Kermán; henever attracted the loyalty of all the followers of SayyidKázim Rashtí.

The followers of ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán became knownas the Shaykhís of Kermán (Shaykhíya-i Kermán or Shaykhíya-i

ájj Karím Ḥ Khání) in contrast with the groups of Shaykhís in

130

Tabríz and Hamadán. He was a traditionalist Shaykhí whoremained loyal to the Shaykhí school. The school of Kermánnever entered into active revolt against the establishedauthorities. They were among the power elite of Kermán whoconservatively limited themselves to religious activitiesmainly in that province. The Shaykhí leader of Kermán was,in fact, the head of his clan, and the leadership of theShaykhís of Kermán has remained in the family of ájjḤMu ammad Karím ḥ Khán to the present day. The successors of

ájj Mu ammad KarḤ ḥ ím Khán were his son Mu ammad ḥ Khán(d. 1324/1906); ájj Zayn al-‘Ábidín Ḥ Khán (d. 1360/1941),his other son; then ájj Abú al-Qásim Ḥ Khán (d. 1389/1969),317

the son of ájj Zayn al-‘Ábidín Ḥ Khán.318 Presently ‘Abdal-Ri á Ibráhímí, the son of ájj Abú al-Qásim ḍ Ḥ Khán, is theleader of the school, and his headquarters are still inKermán.

When ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán appointed his sonMu ammad ḥ Khán as his successor, a great Shaykhí scholar,Mírzá Mu ammad Báqir Hamadání (d. 1319/1901), did not acceptḥthe latter’s leadership. Mírzá Mu ammad Báqir b. Mu ammadḥ ḥJa‘far, originally from I fahán but known as Hamadáníṣbecause he had resided in Hamadán for about thirty years,was born in 1239/1823.319 He received his elementaryeducation in I fahán and then joined ájj Mu ammad Karímṣ Ḥ ḥKhán’s circle in Kermán. He studied with ájj Mu ammadḤ ḥKarím Khán, and became his devoted follower and then hisdeputy in Hamadán.

131

Mírzá Mu ammad Báqir believed that successorship shouldḥbe given to the most learned member of the Shaykhí community—i.e., himself!—not necessarily to a member of ájj Mu ammadḤ ḥKarím Khán’s family. This claim, which was supported bymany Shaykhís, particularly outside Kermán, brought intobeing a new branch of Shaykhís under the leadership of MírzáMu ammad Báqir, who considered himself to be the mostḥrespected and learned Shaykhí after ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán.His followers came to be known as the Báqirís, or theShaykhís of Hamadán. Mehdí Bámdád, in the Táríkh-i Rijál-iIrán, states that after the separation of the Báqirís, thefollowers of ájj MuḤ ḥammad Khán became known as Na iqíṭ(adjective form derived from the noun ná iqṭ which literallymeans speaker) or Nawá iqṭ (plural of ná iqṭ ).320 Thisstatement, however, is not supported by any other sources.

Mírzá Mu ammad Báqir wrote about 150 books andḥtreatises.321 His better known works are al-Ijtináb, writtenin Persian in 1307/1899 to answer the polemical questions‘Abd al- amad b. ‘Abá Alláh al- usayní al MázandaráníṢ Ḥ(d. 1315/1897) had raised in his work, the Tiryáq-i Fárúq;322

and al-U úl al-Díníyaṣ , a work written in Persian on Shí‘ídoctrines.323

In 1315/1897, there was an uprising against theShaykhís of Hamadán, during which Mírzá Mu ammad Báqir fledḥto Náeín and subsequently made his residence in that area.He died in 1319/1901 in Jandaq at the age of eighty.324

132

Mírzá Shafí‘ Tabrízíand the Shaykhís of Tabríz

Mírzá Shafí‘ was a student of Shaykh A mad A sá’í andḥ ḥSayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí. As soon as he returned to Tabríz afterthe death of Sayyid Ká im, he established a ẓ Shaykhí circlethere, and members of his family and the nobility of Tabrízsupported him.325

Mírzá Shafí‘ b. Mírzá Rafí‘ was born in 1218/1803 andlived for eighty-three years. He received the traditionalelementary education in his home town and then went to‘Atabát to continue his education. In ‘Atabát he studiedwith Shaykh Mu ammad asan Najafí, author of the ḥ Ḥ Jawáhiral-Kalám, the most important work on jurisprudence writtenin this period, and then continued with Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí,from whom he received his ijáza. Mírzá Shafí‘ was arespected man of his time, known for his piety and know-ledge.326 After his death, his son, Mírzá Músá, received hisfather’s authority and led the school till 1319/1901, whenhe died.

Of the twenty-one children that Mírzá Músá left behind,Mírzá ‘Alí became the most famous. Born in 1277/1860 andkilled by the Russians in 1330/1912,327 he became known asthe Thiqat al-Islám-i Shahíd. He received his elementaryeducation from his grandfather Mírzá Shafí‘, and others,and went to ‘Atabát for higher religious education.328 Uponhis return to Tabríz in 1308/1890 he became a respected,

133

learned man. With the death of his father, Mírzá Músá, in1319/1901, he became the head of the Shaykhí school ofTabríz. Mírzá ‘Alí was a distinguished scholar in religionand literature. He was interested in new sciences, socialchange and the socio-political issues of his time. Hisinterests led him to participate in the social affairs ofthe country as a secular thinker.329 He wrote several bookssuch as the Risála-i Lálán, on social issues, and theMir’át al-Kutub, an immense biobibliography.330

Up to the time of Mírzá ‘Alí, sources report that inTabríz there was enmity between the Shaykhís and the Shí‘a.A mad Kasraví states that the bloody fighting which hadḥoccurred earlier between the Shí‘a and the Shaykhís hadlessened, but in the years before the ConstitutionalMovement, hatred still existed between them; they hadseparate mosques, they would not intermarry,331 theyconsidered each other as najis (religiously impure), andthey would not use the same public baths.332 Through theefforts of Mírzá ‘Alí, the deeply rooted enmity between theShaykhís and the Shí‘a was reduced,333 and later on, duringthe uprising of the masses for the Constitutional Movement,the two parties came together against despotism, and thegap was bridged.334

The Shaykhís of Tabríz never succeeded in obtaininghegemony over all the Shaykhís, but immediately followingthe death of Sayyid Ká im they attracted those students ofẓhis who held more anti-traditionalist views. In contrast

134

with the Shaykhís of Kermán, the Shaykhís of Tabríz werevery much involved in the current socio-political issues ofthe province of Ádharbáyján, where they had a close relation-ship with the royal family residing there and engaged in thepublic affairs of the society. This involvement manifesteditself most clearly at the time of Mírzá ‘Alí, who came outpublicly against the established authorities and institu-tions and received the support of his adherents. Thisdeveloped into an active rebellion against the establishedorder and ultimately led to the Constitutional Movement.In contrast with the leaders of the Shaykhís of Kermán,who claimed to enjoy the inspired leadership of theircommunity, the leaders of the Shaykhís of Tabríz never, madesuch a claim. While the leadership of the Shaykhís ofKermán was centered in an acknowledged individual, theShaykhís of Tabríz lacked a universally accepted individualleader.

In contrast with the U úlí ṣ ‘ulamá of Tabríz and theShaykhís of Kermán, who were among the local notables withconsiderable landed property and other investments andlived in luxury, the Shaykhís of Tabríz lived a moderatelife.335

Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad ḥ Shirází, The Báband the Bábís

Within a short period after Sayyid Ká im’s death,ẓ

135

Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad declared himself to be the Báb (Gate)ḥto the twelfth Imám for whom the Shí‘a in general and theShaykhís in particular had been waiting.

Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad ḥ Shírází was born into a respectedmerchant family of Shíráz on the first of Mu arram 1235/ḥ1819.336 Orphaned at an early age, he was raised by hismaternal uncle, Sayyid ‘Alí. He received his formalelementary education in his home town and then, as a youngman, went into business with his uncle, who was also amerchant. In 1257/1941, Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad made aḥpilgrimage to ‘Atabát where he stayed for 11 months.337

There he met Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí and attended his circle.Upon his return to Shíráz, he proclaimed himself the Báb on(5 Jumádá al-Ulá 1260/23 of May 1844). He made his declar-ation to Mullá usayn BoḤ shro’í, an eminent student in theShaykhí circle, saying, “O thou who art the first to believein Me! Verily I say, I am the Báb, the Gate of God, andthou art the Bábu’l-Báb, the gate of that Gate. Eighteensouls must, in the beginning, spontaneously and of their ownaccord, accept Me and recognize the truth of My Revelation.”338

Shortly after this event, seventeen other people becamebelievers and, along with Mullá usayn BoḤ shro’í, formed theLetters of the Living ( urúf-i ayyḤ Ḥ ; the numerical value ofthe word ayyḤ is 18). The Letters of the Living, most ofwhom were Shaykhís, as the first disciples of the Báb weregiven the task of proclaiming his advent throughout thecountry. Through the Báb’s writings, which were addressed

136

to religious and secular leaders,339 and through the effortsof his disciples, the Báb’s message spread and within onlysix years reached every corner of Iran, attracted the atten-tion of thousands, and became the main issue of the day.

The ‘ulamá, threatened by the new message, the implica-tion of which was nothing short of undermining the tradi-tional order and the authority of the mujtahids, used alltheir resources to destroy the Báb and his followers. Thestate joined the ‘ulamá in its efforts. As a result, thou-sands of Bábí men, women, and children were murdered in themost horrible circumstances. Lord Curzon, in his Persia andthe Persian Question, writes: “Tales of magnificent heroismillumine the bloodstained pages of Bábí history … andthe fires of Smithfield did not kindle a nobler courage thanhas met and defied the more refined torturemongers ofTehran.”340

The Báb himself, subjected to imprisonment during hissix years of ministry, was sentenced to death and executedin 1266/1849 by a firing squad in Tabríz.

The term “Báb” which Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad applied toḥhimself, was familiar to the people of his time. It hadbeen used by Muslims of various sects for several centuries.As Huart points out,

Báb, an Arabic word signifying “gate”, early re-ceived among the úfís the meaning of the “gateṢby which one enters, means of communication withthat which is within” and was applied to prominentShaikhs. Among the Ismá‘ílís, this word is usedsymbolically for the Shaikh or spiritual leader,who initiates into the mysteries of religion, the

137

asás; among the Nu airís. Salmán al-Fárisí, whoṣwas entrusted with the Propaganda, is the Báb.The Druses call by this name the first spiritualminister, who embodies universal reason.341

Among the Shí‘a the tern Báb was assigned to Four Gates(al-Abwáb al-Arba‘a), four people who claimed to be inter-mediaries between the Hidden Imám and the believers duringthe Lesser Occultation.342 The term is used in almost thesame sense in Shaykhí writings. On the basis of Shí‘íTraditions, Shaykh A mad in his ḥ Shar al-Ziyáraḥ states thatthe Prophet Mu ammad—and the Prophet’s knowledge—is like aḥhouse and that the imáms are like the doors (al-abwáb) toit.343 Shaykh A mad quotes a famous Tradition on theḥauthority of the Prophet which reads, “I am the city ofknowledge and ‘Alí is its Gate.”344

In his account of the concept of ma‘rifa (knowledge),Shaykh A mad states that it exists on six levels:ḥ1. The knowledge of the oneness of God2. The knowledge of al-ma‘ání (the meanings)3. The knowledge of al-abwáb (the gates)4. The knowledge of al-imám (the imáms)5. The knowledge of al-arkán (the pillars)6. The knowledge of al-nuqabá (the guardians)7. The knowledge of al-nujabá (the helpers)345

Then, Shaykh A mad provides details about each level, sayingḥthat in the terminology of the Illuminists (Ahl al-Ishráq)“gate” is equal to the First Intellect, and in the termin-ology of the religious scholars (Ahl al-Shar‘) it is equal

138

to the Pen (al-Qalam) or the Muḥammadan[Muslim] Intellect (al-‘Aqlal-Mu ammadíḥ ), which is the gate between God and Hiscreation.346

Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im were known to theirḥ ẓstudents as the gates. Qurrat al-‘Ain, in her treatises,refers to them by the term “the two gates” (al-bábayn).347

She also refers to Sayyid Ká im as “The earlier gate of God”ẓ(báb Alláh al-muqaddam)348 in comparison to Sayyid ‘AlíMu ammad, who appeared later. Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad alsoḥ ḥrefers to Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im as “báb”. In hisḥ ẓQayyúm al-Asmá, his first work, Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad writes,ḥ“O ye peoples of the earth! During the time of My absence Isent down the Gates unto you. However the believers, exceptfor a handful, obeyed them not. Formerly I sent forth untoyou A mad and more recently Ká im, but apart from the pureḥ ẓin heart amongst you no one followed them.”349

The term “báb”, however, became best known as the titlefor Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad, who at the very beginning of hisḥmission identified himself as the Gate through which menmight attain to the knowledge of the Twelfth Imám,350 theexpected Qá’im. In his first work, the Qayyúm al-Asmá,however, he frequently referred to himself by the term “Gateof God”. The Báb writes: “As to those who deny Him Who isthe Sublime Gate of God, for them We have prepared, asjustly decreed by God, a sore torment. And He, God, is theMighty, the Wise.”351 And also, “I am the ‘Gate of God’ andI give you to drink, by the leave of God, the sovereign

139

Truth, of the crystal-pure waters of His Revelation ….”352

The title of “Gate to the Twelfth Imám” was onlyemployed in the very early period of his mission. Othertitles such as the “Gate of God”, “Remembrance of God”,353

and “The Point of the Bayán”,354 however, are used morefrequently throughout his works.

Although the Báb originally claimed to be the “Gate tothe Twelfth Imám”, later, in his most important work, thePersian Bayán, he claimed to be the Twelfth Imám, the Qá’im.himself.355 In his Dalá’il al-Sab‘356 he explains the reasonfor this change:

Consider the manifold favours vouchsafed by thePromised One, and the effusions of His bountywhich have pervaded the concourse of the follow-ers of Islám to enable them to attain unto salva-tion. Indeed observe how He Who representeth theorigin of creation, He Who is the Exponent of theverse, “I, in very truth, am God”, identified Him-self as the Gate (Báb) for the advent of the pro-mised Qá’im, a descendant of Mu ammad, and in Hisḥfirst Book enjoined the observance of the lawsof the Qur’án, so that the people might not beseized with perturbation by reason of a new Bookand a new Revelation and might regard His Faithas similar to their own, perchance they would notturn away from the Truth and ignore the thing forwhich they had been called into being.357

Although the titles are different, the essence of hismessage was that he was a new messenger with a new RevealedBook and a new order for a new day: his main concern wasnot the perpetuation or revival of Islam, but the birth ofa new order.

The Bábí movement was a forward-looking religiousideology which sprang out of Shaykhí soil. Since Shaykhí

140

writings had prepared the ground for such a declaration,many of the early believers in the Báb were, like his firstdisciples the Letters of the Living, Shaykhís.

The earliest Shaykhís who accepted the Báb were thosewho had rejected ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán and Mírzá Mu ammadḥShafí‘ as leaders of the school on the grounds that theywere not qualified to occupy such a position or becausethere was no indication in the writings of Sayyid Ká imẓregarding the successorship. They argued that, since theappearance of the Qá’im was at hand, Sayyid Ká im had notẓappointed anyone as his successor; rather, he had encouragedhis students to seek for the Qá’im. If the Shaykhís weresupposed to have a leader after Sayyid Ká im, he would haveẓbeen wise enough to appoint one. This attitude was wellsupported in the writings of Sayyid Ká im himself.ẓ

The Shaykhís who believed in the Báb saw in him thefulfillment of Shaykh A mad’s and Siyyid Ká im’s predictionsḥ ẓand, thus, there remained no reason for them to reject him.This group of Shaykhís, who formed the nucleus of the Bábís,were among the most learned students of Sayyid Ká im.ẓAmong the early adherents of the Báb were such distinguishedpersonalities as Qurrat al-‘Ain, Mullá usayn BoḤ shro’í,Shaykh Mu ammad Taqí Haḥ shtrodí, and Mullá ‘Alí Baraghání.

The Bábís traveled tirelessly throughout the country,meeting with religious authorities in various cities, inmosques, in madrasas, and in private gatherings, where theytalked about the Báb and his new movement. They also wrote

141

books and treatises to demonstrate that the advent of theBáb was in accordance with the Qur’án, the Islamic Tradi-tions, and particularly with Shaykhí predictions. Theirenergetic efforts to publicize the claims of the Bábattracted thousands of Persians to his movement.

The early Bábís who actively participated in proclaim-ing the Báb’s mission came from all levels of Iraniansociety: merchants, peasants, landowners, govermentemployees, and the learned class. The number of Bábís fromeach group and their role, in relation to the others, inspreading the new faith requires further study. It is clear,however, that the leadership of the Bábís in their socialorganization and efforts to propagate their faith was in thehands of the newly converted ‘ulamá, particularly theShaykhí ‘ulamá.

Just as the basic reason for accepting the Báb’s claimwas religious, Shí‘í attacks against the Bábís were alsomotivated by religion, for the appearance of the Báb did notfulfill the exoteric aspect of the prophecies recorded inthe Shí‘í texts. The Shí‘a were expecting the Qá’im toreturn from the cold-chamber of Sámarrá, where he went foroccultation, but now they were confronted instead with ayoung man from Shíráz who claimed to be the Qá’im. Indeed,none of the exoteric signs predicted for the advent of theQá’im materialized in the appearance of Sayyid ‘AlíMu ammad, the Báb.ḥ

In addition, in his Persian Bayán, the Báb came out

142

against certain common Muslim practices either enjoined inthe Qur’án or the Traditions, or based upon them. Forexample, he prohibited congregational prayer except in thecase of prayers for the dead.358 He also changed Islamicregulations on marriage, divorce, fasting, and inheritance.359

Most important, he denied the validity of the Quranic lawagainst usury, maintaining that interest on money may betaken.360 These teachings of the Báb, completely differentthan those of the Qur’án, were too much for the ordinaryShí‘í believers to accept. In addition, the Shí‘í religiousand secular authorities regarded them as an obvious threatto their position and mobilized their resources to destroythe Báb and his followers.

While a number of Shaykhís converted to the Báb andactively proclaimed his mission, the Shaykhís of Kermán andTabríz rose against the Bábís. In fact, these two groups ofShaykhís, who had been ideologically in conflict with oneanother, joined in opposition to the Báb. The nature oftheir opposition, however, differed: while the Shaykhís ofKermán expressed their opposition mainly on an intellectuallevel in books and treatises directed against the Báb andhis ideology, the Shaykhís of Tabríz actively cooperatedwith state authorities in the persecution of the Báb himselfand his followers. Both groups of Shaykhís rejected theBáb’s claim to be a new prophet with a new book of laws andregulations361 and responded with hostility to his claimthat he had received a direct revelation from God and that

143

his word was the revealed word of God.362

The most important Shaykhí to raise objections againstthe Báb was his great antagonist, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán.He devoted at least four books entirely to this task,writing three of them within five years of the Báb’sadvent,363 He also attacked the Báb in several other works.All these works are basic sources for understanding theintellectual opposition to the Báb and his ideology.

A comprehensive and convenient synopsis of the chargesleveled against the Báb is ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán’s Risáladar Radd-i Báb-i Murtáb, which he wrote at the request ofNá ir al-Dín ṣ Sháh Qájár. In this book, written in 1283/1866,about two decades later than his other works in refutationof the Báb, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán accuses the Báb ofseveral heresies. In summary, ájj Karím Ḥ Khán charges that,

1. The Báb claimed to be the deputy of the Hidden Imám;later he claimed to be the Hidden Imám himself. Stilllater he claimed to be a prophet with his own religion.Finally, he claimed to be God.

2. The Báb frequently claimed to have received a revela-tion as the Prophet Mu ammad did.ḥ

3. The Báb claimed that he was superior to the Prophet andthat his book was superior to the Qur’án.

4. The Báb claimed to have a new Qur’án. He introducedinnovations; he forbade what the Qur’án consideredlawful and permitted what it considered unlawful. Heinstituted laws which contradicted Quranic laws.

144

5. The Báb considered himself as the only legitimateperson, in whom everyone should believe. He orderedpeople to Holy War (jihád); he permitted the blood ofhis enemies to be shed; he requested that the Muslimswho did not believe in him be executed.

6. The Báb stated that the Day of Resurrection had comeand that the Return had passed. By this statement hemeant that they had occurred with his appearance.

(This was the most blatant statement of abrogation ofthe creed of his society and was an immediate line ofdemarcation between his followers and the Shí‘ícommunity.)

7. The Báb claimed that meeting with him was like meetingwith God.

8. The Báb said that the realm of isthmus (barzakh) is theperiod before the appearance of a new prophet of God.

ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán also states in his book thatthe Báb wrote a letter to him in his own handwriting andsent it to him by courier.364 In the letter, ájj Mu ammadḤ ḥKarím Khán says, the Báb solicited his support and requestedhim to ask the mu’adhdhins to include his name in theadhán.365 When the courier came, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Kháncontinues, he argued with him, giving him reasons for beingunable to accept the Báb’s request. Then, ájj Mu ammadḤ ḥKarím Khán says, he sent him back disappointed and miser-able.366

At the end of his book, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán states

145

that according to the Báb’s writings the Shaykhís areenemies of the Bábís, and that the Báb has warned hisfollowers not to make friends among the Shaykhís or to readShaykhí writings. ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán asserts that itshould be clear that there is no similarity between theBábís and the Shaykhís. The Shaykhís, he says, have alwayshated the Bábís and have written books to refute them. TheShaykhís have always been loyal to the government, toMuslims, and to the household of the Prophet.367 The laststatement of ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán implies, of course,disloyalty on the part of the Bábís.

The opposition of the Shaykhís of Kermán to the Báb andhis followers did not remain on an intellectual level. Itis reported that Mullá Ká im b. Yúsuf, one of Mu ammad Karímẓ ḥKhán’s learned followers, became a follower of the Báb and,in a mosque where ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán and otherShaykhís were present, expressed his belief in the validityof the Báb’s claim to be the Qá’im. Upon this expression,which was followed by words of praise for the Báb and hismovement, ájj Ḥ Ghulám ‘Alí Khán, the brother of ájjḤMu ammad Karím ḥ Khán, seized Mullá Ká im and beat him soẓseverely that he died a few days later.368

The opposition of the Shaykhís of Tabríz to the Bábreflected their strong ties with the political authoritiesof the province in that period. In contrast to theopposition of the Shaykhís of Kermán, which was mostlyintellectual, their opposition took the form of torturing

146

the Báb and his followers and finally of issuing a religiousdecree for the Báb’s death. When the Báb was brought fromhis prison in Chehríq to Tabríz for trial, the ‘ulamá incharge of the interrogation were Shaykhí leaders: ájjḤMullá Ma múd Tabrízí, known as Ni ám al-‘Ulamá (d. 1273/ḥ ẓ1856), Mullá Mu ammad Mamaqání (d. 1269/1852), and Mírzáḥ‘Alí Aṣghar Shaykh al-Islám (d. 1278/1861).369

Ni ám al-‘Ulamá was the head of the court and theẓteacher of Ná ir al-Dín ṣ Sháh. He wrote about the trial, andhis account was used by Ri á Qolí ḍ Khán Hidáyat in his Raw atḍal- afáṢ as well as by I‘timád al-Sal ana in his ṭ al-Mutanabi’ín.370

Mullá Mu ammad Mamaqání was a leading ḥ Shaykhí authorityin Tabríz and one of those who claimed to be the successorof Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí. His sons later became the leadersof opposition to the Bábís. Under the pen name of Nayyir,371

one of his sons, Mírzá Mu ammad Taqí (d. 1312/1894), wroteḥa book against the Bábís entitled a ífat al-AbrárṢ ḥ . Writtenin 1290/1873 and published in 1319/1901,372 it contains theproceedings of the interrogation of the Báb.373

Mírzá ‘Alí Aṣghar Shaykh al-Islám, another participantin the interrogation, was a Shaykhí leader in Ádharbáyján.It was he who took the Báb to his home after the trial andadministered a beating to him. Mírzá ‘Alí Aṣghar died in1278/1861 at the age of ninety-six, but enmity against theBáb remained in his family and found an expression in apolemic against the Báb written by his son, Mírzá Abú

147

al-Qásim, entitled Qal‘ al-Báb.374

The Shaykhís were the first group in Persian society toreact to the claims of the Báb. Some of them became hismost important supporters, disseminated his teachingsaround the country, wrote works to prove that he was indeedthe expected one, and tirelessly invited people to join theBábí movement. They believed that the spirit of the Qur’ánand the essence of Islam had been revealed again in thewritings of the Báb and that the predictions concerning theappearance of the Qá’im had been fulfilled allegorically.For these Shaykhís, Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im wereḥ ẓdivinely guided figures who had paved the way for the Báband enabled them to recognize the one for whom they hadbeen waiting.

In contrast, another group of Shaykhís rose against theBáb, led the opposition to him, and did their best to pre-vent the Bábí movement from spreading. They saw in theBáb’s teachings new laws and regulations which were in manycases different from, or even contrary to, the teachings ofthe Qur’án. They maintained that none of the predictionsregarding the Qá’im had been fulfilled literally in thecoming of the Báb. Therefore, in their eyes the Báb wasfalse and an enemy of Islam who had risen to establish anorder different from the Quranic order. This, in theiropinion, was an obvious “infidelity” (kufr), for theymaintained that the Qur’án and Islam were to last foreternity.

148

149

150

151

152

VIShaykhí teachings that paved the way

for the Báb

The Shaykhí school provided the background for the Bábímovement and its doctrines prepared the way for those of theBáb. The social and intellectual relationship between theShaykhí school and the Bábí movement is beyond dispute: theearliest and most learned followers of the Báb were Shaykhístudents,375 and the Báb himself, while a resident in Karbalá,attended the circle of Sayyid Ká im. Moreover, his worksẓreveal a thorough understanding of Shaykhí literature, ideas,and terminology.

The Báb and Bábí historians in their writings representShaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im as forerunners of the Báb,ḥ ẓ 376

divinely inspired persons who prophesied the appearance ofthe Báb and prepared their students for the recognition ofthe expected Qá’im.377

While no one can doubt that the Shaykhí ideas createdan intellectual atmosphere conducive to the acceptance ofthe Báb, it is necessary to examine the nature of theShaykhí predisposition which ultimately resulted in theconversion of certain Shaykhís into Bábís. For the sake ofhistorical perspective it is important to remember thatShaykhí patterns of belief were not the only cause ofconversion. The charismatic personality of the Báb, as wellas social, political, and cultural factors, played vital

153

roles in it. This chapter will focus on the theological andintellectual considerations that led a great number ofShaykhís to the Bábí movement. These factors are importantnot only for understanding the Shaykhí-Bábí relationship,but especially for revealing the strong links between Islamand the Bábí faith, the strongest of which is the Shaykhíschool.

In his various works, Shaykh A mad devoted muchḥattention to the concept of the imamate, a subject on whichhe received numerous questions from his students. Thesedialogues indicate that this subject was the focal point ofdiscussion and investigation in his circle. Such discus-sions of the imamate naturally led to the consideration ofrelated issues: (1) the finality of the Prophet, (2) theDay of Judgment, and (3) predictions regarding theappearance of the Qá’im, which was expected to occurimminently.378

According to traditional Muslim belief, the ProphetMuḥammad is the last prophet: there will be none after him,and prophecy is sealed by his mission. The basis for thisdoctrine is found in the following verse of the Qur’án:“Muḥammad is not the father of any of your men, but he isthe Apostle of Allah and the seal of the Prophets; and Allahis Cognizant of all things.” (33:40) Although the Shaykhísdo not entirely reject the concept of the finality of theProphet Mu ammad, it appears that their understanding ofḥthis question led to a new approach toward the concept of

154

finality.

According to the Shaykhí theory, a prophetic cyclebegan with Adam and continued to the Prophet Mu ammad.ḥDuring this Adamic cycle, six major prophets appeared: Adam,Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mu ammad. While mostḥMuslims believe that Mu ammad was the last Prophet, ḥ ShaykhA mad maintains that he was the last Prophet only withinḥthis cycle. The Shaykh expresses his idea by making use ofthe cabalistic system: he explains that the letter wáw (و),when pronounced, consists of a consonant “و”,an “ا”(alif) and another “و”. The first “و”, which has anumerical value of six according to the abjad system,379

stands for the six prophets in the Adamic cycle. The “ا”(alif), which stands between the two wáws, represents theQá’im (literally, the word Qá’im means “standing”), and thesecond “و” represents the prophet who will follow the Qá’imand will be a new manifestation of God, identified as theSecond Christ or the Return of usayn. The Qá’im, thus,Ḥstands between the six previous prophets and the one whowill succeed him, like the “ا” (alif) which stands betweenthe two wáws.380

Shaykh A mad’s view of Mu ammad as the final onlyḥ ḥwithin the Adamic cycle implies a continuing divinerevelation through a succession of prophets in a series ofcycles; while each cycle has a beginning and an end, thecyclic process itself is progressive and continuous. Thisconcept of continuity, as opposed to the traditional theory

155

of finality, is expressed most clearly in the sections ofthe Shaykhí works devoted to the concept of absolutecorrespondence between the realm of creation (takwín) andthe realm of religion (tashrí‘).381 According to thisconcept, the pattern of creation as a whole corresponds tothe pattern of religion. The Shaykh offers an example ofsuch correspondence in the development of an embryo, whichmust pass through various stages in the womb of its motherbefore it is born into this world. The Qur’án (23:13–14)tells us that the embryo develops through six stages,namely: (1) life-germ (nu faṭ ), (2) clot (‘alaqa), (3) amorsel of flesh (muḍgha), (4) bones (‘i ámẓ ), (5) flesh(la mḥ ), and (6) another creation (khalqan ákhar), duringwhich stage the spirit enters the body. Just as the embryodevelops through various stages, human spiritual progress isa developmental process, each stage of which corresponds tothe appearance of a prophet whose divine revelation advancesthe spiritual condition of mankind. According to theShaykhí view, the six stages of embryonic developmentcorresponds to the six prophets who appeared in the Adamiccycle: the stage of the life-germ corresponds to Adam; thestage of the clot, to Noah; the stage of the morsel offlesh, to Abraham; the stage of the bones, to Moses; thestage of the flesh, to Jesus; and the stage of anothercreation, to Mu ammad.ḥ 382

Following the analogy further, as the first fivestages of embryonic development are prerequisite to the

156

entrance of the spirit into the body, the first fivereligions are perceived as performing a preparatory functionfor the religion of the Prophet Mu ammad.ḥ 383

The last stage of the development of an embryo is finalonly in respect to its life in the womb, for the now com-pletely developed embryo will be born into another world.Likewise, although the sixth stage of the Adamic cycle,i.e., the Prophet Muḥammad, is the last stage of its cycle,it is, at the same time, the beginning of a new phase in thespiritual development of mankind and marks the inception ofa new cycle.

The Shaykhí concept of continuity as opposed tofinality is also supported by a more general correspondencethat Shaykh A mad maintains exists between the realm ofḥcreation (takwín) and the realm of religion (tashrí‘). TheQur’án says that creation took place in six days: “And Heit is Who created the heavens and the earth in six Days ….”(11:7) Each one of these days, according to Shaykh A mad,ḥcorresponds to a stage of embryonic development as well asto a stage in the formation of the universe.384

Table 21 Sunday

yaum al-a adḥlife germyaum al-nu faṭ

The First Intellectyaum al-‘aqlal-awwal

Existence inthe Universeyaum al-wujúdfi al-‘álam

2 Mondayyaum al-ithnayn

clotyaum al-‘alaqa

The Universal Soulyaum al-nafsal-Kullíya

Quiddityyaum al-máhíya

157

3 Tuesdayyaum al-thulathá

morsel of fleshyaum al-muḍgha

The Universal Natureyaum al- abí‘aṭal-Kullíya

Springyaum fa l al-rabí‘ṣ

4 Wednesdayyaum al-arbi‘á

bonesyaum al-‘izám

The Universal Matteryaum al-máddaal-Kullíya

Summeryaum fa l al- ayfṣ ṣ

5 Thursdayyaum al-Khamís

fleshla mḥ

Subtleyaum al-mithál

Fallyaum fa l al-ṣKharíf

6 Fridayyaum al-Jum‘a

Another Creationyaum yansháuKhalqan Ákhar

Bodyyaum al-jism

Winteryaum fa l al-ṣ shitá

Although this schema may appear to suggest finality,continuity may easily be inferred from it, for the finalstage of a cycle can also be seen as the beginning of a newcycle.

That the Prophet Muḥammad completed the Adamic cycle andbegan a new cycle is clearly expressed by Sayyid Ká im inẓhis explanation of the two Arcs which he believes exist inthe spiritual life of mankind: (1) the Arc of Ascent( u‘údṢ ) and (2) the Arc of Descent (nuzúl).385 The Arc ofAscent begins with Adam and ends with the Prophet Mu ammad,ḥwho is also the opener (fátiḥ) of the Arc of Descent.According to this idea, Mu ammad occupies the highest levelḥof the Arc of Ascent and, thus, is the most exalted one:Mu ammad was the Prophet with whom prophecy ended; he wasḥthe best Prophet among the prophets; and his religionabrogated all the previous religions. However, he was also

158

the opener of the Arc of Descent, in which other prophetswill come.

Any implication of finality in these explanationsappears to refer to the perfection of the Prophet Mu ammadḥand his religion, in relation to other prophets andreligions: that is, the process of the revelation of God’sreligion, which commenced with Adam, reached its mostperfect form in the prophethood of Mu ammad and theḥrevelation of the Qur’án. But this does not necessarilyimply that Mu ammad would be the last prophet ever toḥappear. Thus, the Shaykhís’ reinterpretation of thetraditional Muslim concept of the finality of the Prophetmay well have prepared many Shaykhís to accept the Báb asthe founder of a new religion.

A second factor in creating intellectual readiness foraccepting the Báb was the Shaykhí view that the day of theappearance of the Qá’im would be the Day of Judgment.Unlike the Shí‘a, who believe that the advent of the Qá’imwill simply be one among the numerous events which will takeplace on the Day of Judgment, the Shaykhís hold that theappearance of the Qá’im is the Day of Judgment.386 Thus, tosay that Islam will last until the Day of Judgment is truein the sense that Islam will last until the Qá’im appears.

The Shaykhí identification of the Day of Judgment withthe coming of the Qá’im placed a great significance on thisevent. Belief in the Day of Judgment is one of theconditions for being a Muslim, and preparation for this day

159

is the goal of every believer. Since it is the day on whichall shall be punished or rewarded according to their deeds,and shall be consigned to hell or to paradise, it isdifficult to conceive of any event more crucial in thereligious life of a Muslim. When the Day of Judgment wasinterpreted to be the day of the advent of the Qá’im, asthe Shaykhís maintained, the attention of the adherents ofthe Shaykhí school was focused on the expectation of hiscoming, instead of on the traditional Day of Judgment.

Although the emphasis that Shaykh A mad placed on theḥstation of the imáms, along with his approach toward theconcepts of the finality of the Prophet and the Day ofJudgment, provided the background for the expectation of theQá’im, his prophecies particularly directed the Shaykhís’attention to the recognition of the Báb. In fact, ShaykhA mad’s most important achievement in preparing his studentsḥfor the advent of the Qá’im was his prophecies, which wereelaborated in the works of Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí. In thisregard, Sayyid Ká im’s ẓ Will is particularly important.387

Although in his Will Sayyid Ká im uses the term Walíẓ(Protector), not Qá’im, his description of the Walí is thename as his description of the Qá’im in other works. Inhis Will Sayyid Ká im does not go into detail to prophesyẓthe name of the Walí or the exact date of his coming, buthe clearly states that for every period (‘a rṣ ) there is aWalí and the appearance of the Walí will never cease. Theday of the advent of the Walí, in Sayyid Ká im’s terminology,ẓ

160

will be the Day of Gathering together (yaum al-jam‘),388

another name for the Day of Judgment. The day of the adventwill witness great changes and upheavals. The one who willappear is the Sign of God (Áyat Alláh), who will come withproofs. He will arise among people as did the ProphetMu ammad. These statements indicate that Sayyid Ká im didḥ ẓnot believe that the Twelfth Imám would return fromoccultation as the Qá’im; rather, he believed that the Qá’imwas living among people and would appear as the ProphetMu ammad did.ḥ

In his Will, Sayyid Ká im, after advising his studentsẓto be steadfast, pious, unified, and detached from materiallife, quotes a Quranic verse which reads, “It alters themortal. Over it are nineteen angels.” (74:29–30) AlthoughSayyid Ká im does not explicitly state his purpose inẓquoting the verse, it has been interpreted as an allusion tothe Báb and his first eighteen followers, The Letters of theLiving ( urúf-i ayyḤ Ḥ ), who formed the first unit (wá id-iḥAwwal) of the Bábís.

Before examining the Shaykhí prophecies in more detail,it is necessary to consider the conception of the advent ofthe Mahdí and the Second Christ in Islam in general, and inthe Twelver Shí‘a literature in particular.389

There is no mention of a Mahdí in the Qur’án, nor isthere any mention in the earliest Traditions. LaterTraditions say that the Mahdí will appear before the worldcomes to its end and will inaugurate a new era of prosperity

161

and salvation, functioning as a ruler, renewing all things,and establishing peace and justice on earth. The advent ofthe Mahdí is to be preceded or accompanied by various signs.

In Islam, the term Mahdí is a title for a DivinelyGuided One, equivalent to the messiah, the deliverer. Whilefor the Sunnís the Mahdí does not refer to any specificperson, the Twelver Shí‘a identify him with the TwelfthImám, who went into occultation in 260/872.390 For them,therefore, the return of the Twelfth Imám is identical withthe advent of the Mahdí. Shí‘í literature containsliterally hundreds of Traditions on the authority of theShí‘í Imáms, concerning different aspects of the Mahdí’sprivate and social life, character, and function. However,these Traditions are inconsistent regarding his name, hisdescent, the year of this appearance, and his physical andspiritual qualifications. For example, we find him givensuch varied titles as “The Qá’im”391 (The one who rises),“Baqíyat Alláh”392 (The Remnant of God), “ á ib al-ZamánṢ ḥ ”393

(The Lord of the Age), and “al-Munta arẓ ”394 (The ExpectedOne).

Mu ammad Báqir Majlisí (d. 1111/1700), compiler of theḥBi ár al-Anwárḥ , the lengthiest and most comprehensivecollection of Shí‘í Traditions, has denoted the thirteenthvolume of this work to Traditions on the Mahdí. TheseTraditions almost unanimously affirm that the world will notend until a man from the family of the Prophet, in the lineof ‘Alí and Fá ima, appears. He will rule according to theṭ

162

example of the Prophet. The Qá’im will come at a time ofgreat troubles when the world is approaching its end. Therewill be an increasing number of hard-hearted evildoers. TheQá’im will make efforts to establish justice and equity andrepel tyranny and oppression. He will cause the strong andthe weak to be as equals; he will bring salvation to earth.Through his efforts, Islam will spread throughout the world.

The Traditions declare that the Qá’im is the onethrough whom God will manifest His faith. He is the onewhom God “will make victorious over the whole world untilfrom every place the call to prayer will be heard, and allreligion will be to Allah.”395 The Qá’im is described as thechampion of the faith, who will strengthen God’s religion.He is the means by which God proves His existence to Hiscreation. Without the Qá’im the world cannot function.Such a Leader is needed, whether manifest and well known orhidden and obscure.

The Qá’im will fulfill God’s promises. He is to besent by God to prepare the way for the Return of Christ.The Twelver Shí‘a believe in the Mahdí and his return as anessential element of their faith. In the Shí‘í Traditions,a great number of Quranic verses are interpreted asreferences to the Qá’im.396

The Shaykhí prophecies are mostly based on the Shí‘íTraditions. Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im, however, addedḥ ẓto the prophecies of the Traditions by elaborating them.Shaykhí prophecies are the most abstruse parts of the

163

Shaykhí works, employing figurative concepts, the abjadsystem, and anagrams. Very rarely can a straightforwardprophecy be found. The complexity and the equivocal natureof the prophecies suggest that only people familiar withShaykhí terminology and doctrines could understand them;other people would be able to do so only through oralexplanations. The complexity is due to the social andreligious climate of the time, which did not allow theShaykhí leaders to openly provide information in plainlanguage about the Qá’im. It is reported that once SayyidKá im was asked by one of his students, “‘Why is it, thatẓyou neither reveal His [i.e., the Qá’im’s] name nor identifyHis Person?’ To this Siyyid replied by pointing with hisfinger to his own throat, implying that were he to divulgeHis name, they both would be put to death instantly.”397

Shaykhí prophecies are so numerous, so repetitious,and so widespread throughout the Shaykhí works that it seemshopeless to try to put all of them into a system or presentthem in a form that encompasses all the details. Theprophecies speak about two distinct persons who would appearone after another: the Qá’im and the Return of usayn. TheḤprophecies concerning the Qá’im’s name, characteristics,date of his advent, and the circumstances under which hewill appear are by far more numerous than the propheciesconcerning the Return of usayn.Ḥ

As in Shí‘í Traditions, the Qá’im is also referred toby other titles, such as á ib al-ZamánṢ ḥ (The Lord of the

164

Age), ujjat AlláhḤ (Proof of God), Baqíyat Alláh (TheRemnant of God), Dhikr (The Remembrance), and, morecommonly, Mahdí (The Divinely Guided One).

Shaykhí prophecies on the Qá’im are of two kinds:prophecies which closely repeat the popular expectations ofthe Shí‘a concerning the coming of the Qá’im and prophecieswhich are not literally in accordance with popular expecta-tions. In the prophecies of the first kind, the TwelfthImám is alive and present in the world, but invisible. Heis the son of asan al-‘Askarí (d. 260/872), the EleventhḤImám, from the family of the Prophet. The Qá’im, therefore,is identified as the Twelfth Imám. The advent of the Qá’imwill be accompanied by the Return of the imáms as well astheir enemies. In the year of the arrival of the Qá’im,the following events will occur: there will be a seriousfamine, heavy rain will fall from the twentieth day of themonth of Jumádá to the beginning of Rajab. The Dajjál, orAntichrist—the False Messiah, who performs miracles andpretends that he is God—will appear in I fahán in the monthṣof Rajab, and the Sufyání, ‘Uthmán b. ‘Utba, will appear inRamla in wádí Yábis. In the same month of Rajab, the bodyof ‘Alí will be manifested in the disk of the sun and itwill be possible for everyone to recognize him. There willbe an eclipse of the moon at the end of the month ofRama án. There will also be an eclipse of the sun on theḍfifth (or the middle) of Rama án. It will be in the earlyḍmorning of the twenty-third (of Rama án) that Gabriel willḍ

165

announce that ‘Alí and his followers (Shí‘at ‘Alí) were onthe right path, and at the end of the day Iblis willannounce the rightfulness of the martyr ‘Uthmán and hisfollowers.398

On the twenty-fifth of Dhí al- ijja, Nafs al-ZakíyaḤMu ammad b. al-Hasanḥ 399 will be killed between the Rukn andthe Maqám.400 Friday, the tenth of Mu arram, will be theḥday of the advent of the Greater Light of God (Núr Alláhal-Akbar), the Lord of the Age ( a ib al-ZamánṢ ḥ ), the Qá’im,who will go to the Masjid al- arámḤ 401 and kill the preacher,and then will enter the Ka‘ba. At night he will call uponhis followers and 313 of them, from the east and the west,will be assembled around him, and the first believer in theQá’im will be Gabriel.402

The Qá’im will remain at Mecca until ten thousandpeople have gathered around him. At this time the Sufyání403

will send his armies to Kufa, Medina, and also to Mecca.This last army will be swallowed up by the earth, but twoof its members will survive to convey the news to the Qá’imand to the Sufyání. The Qá’im will send troops around theworld, will kill the Dajjál and the Sufyání, and will fillthe earth with justice and righteousness, whereas before ithad been filled with oppression and cruelty. He will makehis residence at Kufa.404

The Qá’im will reign for seven years, but each of theseyears is equal to ten years of our time. Therefore, he willrule for seventy of our years.405

166

The second kind of Shaykhí predictions. which arepeculiar to the Shaykhí works, but again are based onTraditions, prophesy the name, the date, and the character-istics of the Qá’im and the Second usayn. Only the mostḤobvious prophecies in the Shaykhí works will be discussedhere.

Shaykh A mad, in one of his letters, foretold the yearḥof the appearance of the Qá’im in mysterious language whichemploys the cabalistic system. According to this prophecy,the year 1260/1844 was the year in which the Qá’im wouldappear.406 This prophecy is supported by Sayyid Ká im’sẓstatement that the Qá’im will appear in the thirteenthcentury.407 Sayyid Ká im’s prophecy, however, is elaboratedẓin his Risála for Mullá usayn ‘Alí,Ḥ 408 where he says thatthe voice of God will be heard after a thousand years.Since according to the common Shí‘í belief, the Twelfth Imámwas God’s voice among men until the year 260/872 when hewent into occultation, the thousand-year period would end in1260/1844, when the voice of God would be heard again.

Regarding the name of the Qá’im, Sayyid Ká im, at theẓbeginning of his Shar al-Qa ídaḥ ṣ ,409 indicates that thenumerical value of his name is equal to twice the numericalvalue of the letter “K—ك” when it is pronounced. Thepronunciation of this letter is “Káf—كاف”, which consistsof three letters: “K-á-f— ك ا The numerical value of .”فthe pronounced “Káf—كاف” is 101 (K=20, á=1, f=80), and itsdouble is 202, which is equal to the numerical value of the

167

name of the Báb, ‘Alí Mu ammad “ḥ ( :” محممد 70= ع الي ,4 = د, 40 = م, 8 = ح, 40 = م, 10 = ي, 30= ل ).

The Báb, in a letter to one of his followers, MulláMu ammad Ja‘far b. Mu ammad Kermání, indicates the fulfill-ḥ ḥment of this prophecy by his appearance.410 Qurrat al-‘Ainalso states in one of her treatises that Sayyid Ká im’sẓprediction about the name of the Qá’im is fulfilled in theBáb.411

Nabíl, the author of one of the earliest histories ofthe Bábí movement, relates that in the same year the Báb wasborn (that is, 1235/1819), Shaykh A mad suffered the loss ofḥhis son, Shaykh ‘Alí. Shaykh A mad explained to hisḥstudents, who mourned his loss, that he had offered his sonas a sacrifice for ‘Alí, whose appearance they were await-ing.412 This, Nabíl says, indicates that the name of theQá‘im was to be ‘Alí.

The Shaykhí works contain numerous indications regard-ing the characteristics of the Qá’im. To disciples whoquestioned him about this subject, Sayyid Ká im replied thatẓhe would be from a noble lineage, a descendant of Fáṭima ofthe family of Háshim. He would be young and possess know-ledge which is not derived from schools but is given to himby God. He would be of medium height, and free from bodilydefects. He would not smoke. He would be illustrious andan extreme devotee.413

In their works, on numerous occasions Shaykh A mad andḥSayyid Ká im predicted the signs, virtues, and character-ẓ

168

istics of the Second Christ or Imám usayn. Like theḤShaykhí predictions on the Qá’im, these are of two kinds:predictions that almost repeat the popular expectations ofthe Shí‘a and predictions that are peculiar to the Shaykhísand are not found in Shí‘í works.

In the first kind, Shaykhí sources specify that in thefifty-ninth year of the Qá’ím’s reign, usayn will appear.ḤHe will be accompanied by the seventy-two martyrs ofKarbalá. After a seventy-year reign, the Qá’im will bekilled, and usayn will give him burial.Ḥ 414 Then usayn willḤtake over the Qá’im’s responsibilities and will kill Shimr,Yazíd,415 and other enemies who will have returned. Finally,

usayn will defeat all the enemies and will reign for fiftyḤthousand years.416

Of the second kind of predictions, Shaykh A mad, in aḥletter to Sayyid Ká im,ẓ 417 states, “For every prophecy is aterm, and you will come to know, and most certainly you willcome to know about it. After a Time (Ba‘da ínḤ ).”418 In thisstatement, the Arabic word, “ ínḤ according to the ,”حين—Abjad system, is equal to 68: ( 50 = ن, 10 = ي, 8 = ح ).“After a time” (ba‘da ínḥ ) means 69, i.e., ḥin is 68 andafter the ínḥ is 69. The Shaykhí view of the term “after atime” (ba‘da ínḥ ) is based upon Imám ádiq’s interpretationṢof the Quranic verse: “And most certainly you will come toknow about it after a time (ba‘da íninḥ ).” (38:88) Imám

ádiq says that the Quranic term “Ṣ ba‘da ínḥ ” refers to theyear in which the Qá’im will appear.419

169

It was in the year 69 (1269/1852) that Bahá’u’lláh,while in the prison of Siyáh Chál in Tehrán, claimed to havereceived his revelation. Although the term Qá’im wasunderstood by the Bábís to refer to the Báb and not toBahá’u’lláh, Imám ádiq says that the Qá’im will appear inṢthe year 69. It seems, therefore, that the term Qá’im inthis Tradition has been used by the Shaykhís who becameBábís as a general term referring to the “one who willrise”, which could be a reference to Bahá’u’lláh as well asto the Báb.

The Báb, in a letter to Mu ammad ḥ Sháh Qájár, mentionsthe words “after ínḤ ” (ba‘da ínḥ ) as a reference to theperson who will arise in the year 1269/1852, i.e., theSecond Christ (later understood by many Bábís to beBahá’u’lláh). In his letter the Báb says, “Praise be untoHim Who at this very moment perceiveth in this remote prisonthe goal of My desire. He is the One Who beareth witnessunto Me at all times and beholdeth Me ere the inception of‘after ín’.”Ḥ 420

Cryptic language in the introductory pages of SayyidKá im’s major book, ẓ Shar al-Qa ídaḥ ṣ ,421 was understood laterby the Bábís as a reference to the name of Bahá’u’lláh.

It is important to remember that those Shaykhís whobelieved that the Báb was the Qá’im were still expecting theadvent of the Second Christ or the Return of usayn in theḤyear 69 (1269) as Shaykhí works had predicted. A goodexample of such an expectation is found in a short treatise

170

written by Mullá Mu ammad ‘Alí Baraḥ ghání,422 the brother ofthe famous Mullá Mu ammad Taqí, known as ḥ Shahíd-i Thálith,who issued the takfír against Shaykh A mad. This expecta-ḥtion was based primarily on the Shaykhí prophecies which theBáb reaffirmed in his letter to Mu ammad ḥ Sháh as well as onnumerous other occasions in his writings, particularly inhis major work the Persian Bayán.423 In these instances,the Báb refers to the year 9 after the commencement of hisministry, that is, 1269/1852, as the year in which theSecond Christ would appear.424 The year 9 in the Báb’swritings corresponds with the “ba‘da ínḥ ” in Shaykh A mad’sḥworks; both refer to 1269/1852, the year in whichBahá’u’lláh received his first revelation in the prison ofthe Siyáh Chál.

The Shaykhí doctrines, particularly those concerningthe concept of finality and the Day of Judgment, along withShaykh A mad’s and Sayyid Ká im’s predictions regarding theḥ ẓQá’im, created among adherents of the school a predisposi-tion for the recognition of the Báb. But these were notthe only factors that led some of the Shaykhís to believe inthe Báb. Those Shaykhís who became Bábís were not onlyintellectually ready to accept him, but they saw in the Báband in his writings the continuation of the revolutionaryspirit which had been initiated in the Shaykhí school. Andthey could also put it into practice, for the Bábí movementnot only released them from obedience to the religiousauthorities and their dogma, it urged them to express

171

fearlessly the principles of the new movement.

While the Shaykhí school strongly opposed the viewsand practices of the Shí‘í ‘ulamá, it was still sympatheticand loyal to the popular beliefs of the Shí‘a. The Bábímovement, however, was more aggressive and far-reaching inits social impact although less Shí‘í-oriented than theShaykhí school. As time went on, the Bábí movement devel-oped into an independent religion with its own books andprinciples.

Although the hopes of the Shaykhís for a restorationand revitalization of Shí‘a were not completely fulfilled,the doctrines of the Shaykhí school paved the way andprepared some of its adherents to find the fulfillment oftheir hopes in the Bábí movement—a movement which was tobe more comprehensive, more reformist, and more future-oriented than that of the Shaykhís.

172

173

174

VIIThe relationship of Shaykhí doctrines

to the religious thought of the Báb

Shaykh A mad won a wide following among various groupsḥin Persian society, a popularity which can be attributed toseveral factors. Shaykh A mad traveled widely and enjoyedḥthe respect of the Sháh and some members of the royalfamily. He spoke repeatedly of his spiritual communion, inhis dreams, with the Shí‘í imams; this spiritual communion,traditionally a sign of holiness and inspired knowledge inthe Shí‘í society, added to his charismatic character and,consequently, brought him respect and popularity, particu-larly among the masses. Shaykh A mad’s knowledge in allḥbranches of Islamic sciences, his indisputable piety, andhis love and extraordinary respect for the Shí‘í imámsbrought him great popularity among the religious Persians.Unlike the fundamentalist religious writers, his discussionsof religious matters had a rationalistic flavor, whichattracted religious people as well as intellectuals seekingsuch an approach toward religious problems, Shaykh A mad’sḥopposition to the dominant religious and philosophicalauthorities provided an opportunity for those who did nothave learning and gave them the encouragement to expresstheir opposition. They found Shaykh A mad an outspoken,ḥlearned leader who was capable of combatting dogmas andauthority of those leading figures.

175

While many Persians were attracted to Shaykh A mḥ ad,several leading authorities rose against him,425 and,naturally, most Persians remained indifferent. The causesof religious leaders’ opposition to Shaykh A mad wereḥdiverse but not difficult to surmise. Many of his opponentsdid not thoroughly understand his ideology; thus, theiropposition was based on misinterpretation of Shaykh A mad’sḥteachings. Those who opposed him did not do so merelybecause of his doctrine, but because of the popularity andpower he had won among the masses and the ruling class,which aroused the jealousy of the ‘ulamá. Opposition alsoderived from the ‘ulamá’s general attitude toward anyone whodenied the traditional dogmas. It was obvious to them thatsome of Shaykh A mad’s teachings diverged from those of theḥShí‘a, and this was sufficient reason for the ‘ulamá tocharge him with introducing innovations into religion.

The opposition of the ‘ulamá found expression in anumber of polemical works written to refute Shaykh A mad andḥhis ideology.426 These works are also important sources forthe intellectual history of nineteenth century Iran. Amirror of the psychological and religious reaction of the‘ulamá toward Shaykh A mad, they also reveal how the ḥ ‘ulamáattempted to protect the Sharí‘a from innovations.

The most famous opponents of Shaykh A mad during hisḥlifetime were the eminent U úli ṣ ‘ulamá of ‘Atabát and Iran,including Mullá Mu ammad Ja‘far Astarábádí,ḥ 427 Mullá ÁqáDarbandí, Shaykh Mu ammad usayn Najafí,ḥ Ḥ 428 and Sayyid Ibráhím

176

Qazvíní. A leading figure in the intellectual oppositionto Shaykh A mad, and to the ḥ Shaykhís in general, was ‘Abdal- amad b. ‘Abd Alláh al- usayní al-Mázandarání,Ṣ Ḥ 429 who wasborn in 1255/1839 in Kermánsháh. His mother was thedaughter of Sayyid A mad b. Mu ammad ‘Alí Kermánḥ ḥ sháhí, awell-known U úlí scholar.ṣ 430 A typical opponent of theShaykhís, usayní is important because he not onlyḤcriticized the views of Shaykh A mad, but also those ofḥSayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí and ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání.

To protect the Sharí‘a, he wrote three polemical worksrefuting Shaykhí ideology. The first was al-Mará id ‘AláṣShar al-Fawá’idḥ , which was written to refute the Sharḥal-Fawá’id of Shaykh A mad. The second was the ḥ Tanbíhal-Anám, written in 1293/1876 to refute ájj Mu ammad KarímḤ ḥKhán’s best known work, the Irshád al-‘Awám.431 In the Tanbíh,

usayní levels one hundred charges against ájj Mu ammadḤ Ḥ ḥKarím Khán’s views as expressed in his Irshád.432 The thirdwork of usayní which deserves attention is the Ḥ Tiryáq-iFárúq, written in 1301/1883. The Tiryáq is a convenientsynopsis of the most important charges that Shí‘í scholarshave leveled against the Shaykhís. Unlike the other twopolemical books by usayní, which were written to criticizeḤspecific Shaykhí works, the Tiryáq attacks the entireShaykhí ideology, and, since it was written after them, itis more comprehensive.

In his book, usayní criticizes the most importantḤworks of Shaykh A mad. Sayyid Ká im, and ájj Mu ammad Karímḥ ẓ Ḥ ḥ

177

Khán. His main sources are the Shar al-Ziyáraḥ and theShar al-Fawá’idḥ of Shaykh A mad, ḥ Shar al-ḥ Khu ba al-ṭ

utunjíyaṬ of Sayyid Ká im, and the ẓ Irshád al-‘Awám of ájjḤMu ammad Karím ḥ Khán.

To demonstrate the innovations of the Shaykhís,usayní frequently refers to the works of several leadingḤ

Shí‘í authorities such as Mufíd, adúq, ‘Alláma-i illí, andṢ ḤMajlisí. usayní contends that the original Ḥ Shí‘í ideologyis expressed in the works of these scholars, and that theShaykhí doctrines which contradict this ideology areinnovations.

In the Tiryáq, usayní enumerates forty-threeḤideological differences between the Shaykhís and the Shí‘a.The differences can be summarized under three main headings:the imáms, ontology, and eschatology.

Regarding the imáms, usayní states that the Ḥ Shaykhísdiffer from the Shí‘a by maintaining that:

1. The imáms are the Four Causes: the notional cause(‘illat-i fá‘ilí), the material cause (‘illat-i máddí),the formal cause (‘illat-i úríṣ ), and the final cause(‘illat-i ghá’í)433

2. The imáms’ knowledge is inspired ( u úríḥ ḍ ) knowledge,derived from the presence of God434

3. The imáms are lords, and the people are their slaves435

4. The imáms’ physical bodies do not crumble to dust436

usayni’s conclusions with regard to the Ḥ Shaykhís’ viewof the imáms is that the Shaykhís have exaggerated the

178

position of the imáms, and, therefore, they are infidelsjust like the Mufawwi a and the ḍ Ghálíya.437

Regarding ontology, usayní states that the Ḥ Shaykhísdiffer from the Shí‘a by maintaining that:

1. God’s knowledge is essential and it is identical withHis essence438

2. Existence is created, limitless, and new439

3. Existence is eternal in time. but created in itssubstance440 and

4. Angels are not temporal, but they are spiritual beings441

Regarding eschatology, usayní states that the Ḥ Shaykhísdiffer from the Shí‘a by maintaining that:

1. Subtle bodies, not physical bodies, will be resur-rected442

2. Paradise is the love of the imáms443

3. Paradise and hell do not have identity by themselvesbut are the result of man’s own conduct444

4. The Ascension of the Prophet was not with his physicalbody, but rather with his spirit. By his Ascension,the Prophet reached the highest level of his knowledgebut never reached God445

5. The rank of the Qá’im is the fifth, after Mu ammad, ‘Alí,ḥasan, and usayn, and not the twelfthḤ Ḥ 446

6. The Twelfth Imám will return in his subtle, not hisphysical body447

7. The six days of creation stand for (1) intellect, (2)soul, (3) nature, (4) matter, (5) subtle, and (6)

179

body;448 the concept that the world was created in sixdays is not literally correct

usayní accuses the Ḥ Shaykhís of misinterpreting severalverses of the Qur’án. He mentions cases such as the Shaykhíbelief that Mount Sinai is a symbol for the heart of abeliever,449 and that the “manifestation of the light uponthe Mountain”450 stands for the manifestation of the light ofMoses’ essence upon his heart. The Shaykhís, usayníḤstates, believe that the “Barrier of Dhulqarnayn”451 standsfor “dissimulation” (taqíya),452 and that Gog and Magog inthe Qur’án453 have an allegorical meaning and refer to theenemies of Shí‘a.454 In another case. usayní states that byḤ“Children of Israel” (baní Isrá’íl),455 the Shaykhís mean theProphet and his children, because, according to the ShaykhísIsrá’íl literally means the Slave of God (‘Abd Alláh) and‘Abd Alláh was the name of the Prophet’s father.456

At the end of his book usayní accuses Ḥ Shaykh A mad ofḥhaving claimed to receive Revelation (wa yḥ ) from God andalso of knowing the occult sciences.457

The opposition of Shí‘í ‘ulamá to the Shaykhís did not,however, remain on an intellectual level. In several citiesserious clashes occurred between the Shí‘a and the Shaykhísduring which members of both parties were killed andproperty was destroyed. One such clash occurred when ájjḤMírzá A mad ḥ Khoeí of Tabríz,458 a leading mujtahid ofÁdharbáyján, issued a takfír against the Shaykhís of thatcity. A massive uprising against the Shaykhís followed, in

180

which many were killed.459

In another clash, in 1314/1896, the U úlís of Hamadánṣattacked and burned Shaykhí houses and killed Mírzá Mu ammadḥBáqir Hamadání, the leader of the Shaykhís of Hamadán, aswell as a certain Mírzá Mu ammad, a distinguished ḥ Shaykhí ofthat city.460

The serious intellectual opposition of the U úlí ṣ ‘ulamáand their attacks against the Shaykhís prevented theShaykhís from gaining a following or even considerablerecognition in Persian society.

As time went on, most of the Shaykhís lost their groupidentity and became reassimilated into Shí‘a. But thoseShaykhís who remained loyal to the leadership of theShaykhís of Kermán continued to function as a group.

While Shaykh A mad’s ideology survived only to aḥlimited extent among his own followers, it had its greatestimpact upon the religious life of the Persians through theBábí movement. However, the Bábí ideology cannot, by anymeans, be considered an extension of the Shaykhí school,because of several radical differences between the two.Shaykh A mad never claimed to be a prophet, as the Bábḥdid;461 Shaykh A mad never claimed to have receivedḥRevelation or a revealed book from God, as the Báb did;462

Shaykh A mad never claimed to have brought a ḥ Qur’án, as theBáb did.463

Nevertheless, Shaykhí thought had a great impact uponBábí ideology: there is no doubt that Bábí doctrines have

181

closer ties to Shaykhí thought than to any other branch ofIslamic belief.464

It is impossible at this stage to fully discuss thedepth and scope of Shaykhí influence upon Bábí doctrines,partly because most of the Báb’s main works are still inmanuscript form and partly because social and religiouscircumstances have hindered the study of them.

On the basis of better-known, published Bábí sources,however, it is possible to examine some of the basic areasin which Shaykhí thought had an impact upon Bábí ideology.

Of all the Islamic sects, the Shí‘a are best known fortheir allegorical interpretation of the Qur’án. Thisfeature of Shí‘í thought developed even further in theShaykhí approach toward the Qur’án, which Shaykh A madḥinterpreted allegorically rather than literally, in order toreconcile revelation with reason. This allegorical approachtoward the Qur’án reached its full development in thewritings of the Báb.

Another major area was the Shaykhí attitude toward theimáms. As discussed earlier, Shaykh A mad, in all of hisḥworks, emphasized the vital role of the imáms in thereligious life of the believers and, in fact, oftenmentioned his personal contact with them. In contrast withthe general view of the Shí‘a, who believed that during theoccultation period,465 the ‘ulamá were to be the inter-mediaries between the believers and the imán, which madethem the center of attention in Shí‘í society, Shaykh A madḥ

182

shifted the attention of his followers to the imáms. ShaykhA mad’s view was accepted by the Báb and resulted in theḥcomplete elimination of the clergy in the Bábí religioussystem.

The third main area in which Shaykh A mad’s ideas hadḥan impact in Bábí doctrines was his attitude toward the

úfís, theologians, and philosophers whose views contradictṢthe imáms’ views thereby misleading people. The Báb, in hiswritings, carried these views even further by blaming thelearned for preventing people from recognizing the truth.The Báb expresses his view in regard to the Christianlearned in the following passage:

It is recorded in a tradition that of the entireconcourse of the Christians no more than seventypeople embraced the Faith of the Apostle of God.The blame falleth upon their doctors, for if thesehad believed, they would have been followed bythe mass of their countrymen. Behold, then, thatwhich hath come to pass! The learned men ofChristendom are held to be learned by virtue oftheir safeguarding the teaching of Christ, andyet consider how they themselves have been thecause of men’s failure to accept the Faith andattain unto salvation! Is it still thy wish tofollow in their footsteps? The followers of Jesussubmitted to their clerics to be saved on theDay of Resurrection, and as a result of this obed-ience they eventually entered into the fire, andon the Day when the Apostle of God appeared theyshut themselves out from the recognition of Hisexalted Person. Dost thou desire to follow suchdivines?

Nay, by God, be thou neither a divine withoutdiscernment nor a follower without discernment,for both of these shall perish on the Day ofResurrection. Rather it behooveth thee to bea discerning divine, or to walk with insight inthe way of God by obeying a true leader of reli-gion.

In every nation thou beholdest unnumberedspiritual leaders who are bereft of true discern-

183

ment, and among every people thou dost encountermyriads of adherents who are devoid of the samecharacteristic. Ponder for a while in thy heart,have pity on thyself and turn not aside thineattention from proofs and evidences. However,seek not proofs and evidences after thine idlefancy; but rather base thy proofs upon what Godhath appointed. Moreover, know thou that neitherbeing a man of learning nor being a follower isin itself a source of glory. If thou art a manof learning, thy knowledge becometh an honour,and if thou art a follower, thine adherence untoleadership becometh an honour, only when theseconform to the good-pleasure of God. And bewarelest thou regard as an idle fancy the good-pleasureof God; it is the same as the good-pleasure ofHis Messenger. Consider the followers of Jesus.They were eagerly seeking the good-pleasure ofGod, yet none of them attained the good-pleasureof His Apostle which is identical with God’s good-pleasure, except such as embraced His Faith.466

The Báb states that man’s highest station is attainedthrough faith in God and by acceptance of what has beenrevealed by Him, and not through the speculations of thelearned. Then he says, “True knowledge, therefore, is theknowledge of God, and this is none other than the recogni-tion of His Manifestation in each Dispensation.”467 Thistrue knowledge, the Báb asserts, is the most noble ofcreated things.468

Like Shaykh A mad, the Báb maintains that truth isḥcontained within the writings of the prophet of God, andthat man should seek the truth in those writings. Hewrites,

Ponder a while and observe that everythingin Islam hath its ultimate and eventual beginningin the Book of God. Consider likewise the Dayof the Revelation of Him Whom God shall make man-ifest,469 He in Whose grasp lieth the source ofproofs, and let not erroneous considerations shutthee out from Him, for He is immeasurably exalted

184

above them, inasmuch as every proof proceedethfrom the Book of God which is itself the supremetestimony, as all men are powerless to produceits like. Should myriads of men of learning,versed in logic, in the science of grammar, inlaw, in jurisprudence and the like, turn away fromthe Book of God, they would still be pronouncedunbelievers. Thus the fruit is within the supremetestimony itself, not in the things derived there-from.470

While Shaykh A mad never went so far as to forbid theḥstudy of logic, philosophy, and jurisprudence,471 the Báb didso, maintaining that they were unprofitable pursuits and anobstacle to the recognition of the truth.

The fourth area in which Shaykh A mad’s ideas affectedḥBábí thought concerned the understanding of the concept offinality of the Prophet. Shaykh A mad maintained that theḥappearance of the prophets follows a cyclical pattern. TheBáb reaffirms this concept in the following words:

It is clear and evident that the object of allpreceding Dispensations bath been to pave the wayfor the advent of Mu ammad, the Apostle of God.ḥThese, including the Muḥammadan Dispensation, havehad, in their turn, as their objective the Revela-tion proclaimed by the Qá’im. The purpose under-lying this Revelation, as well as those that pre-ceded it, has in like manner, been to announcethe advent of the Faith of Him Whom God will makemanifest. And this Faith—the Faith of Him WhomGod will make manifest—in its turn, together withall the Revelations gone before it, have as theirobject the Manifestation destined to succeed it.And the latter, no less than all the Revelationspreceding it, prepare the way for the Revelationwhich is yet to follow. The process of the riseand setting of the Sun of Truth will thus indefin-itely continue—a process that hath no beginningand will have no end.472

Like Shaykh A mad, the Báb compares the successiveḥappearance of the prophets and their increasing perfection

185

to a body in successive stages of growth.473 As an individ-ual develops toward perfection during the various stages ofhis growth in the womb, so mankind as a whole improves insuccessive cycles in the world.474 The Báb writes:

For had the embryo not existed, how could he havereached his present state? Likewise had the re-ligion taught by Adam not existed, this Faith wouldnot have attained its present stage. Thus considerthou the development of God’s Faith until the andthat hath no end.475

And also:

Likewise continue thou to ascend through one rev-elation after another, knowing that thy progressin the knowledge of God shall never come to anend, even as it can have no beginning.476

He also states that

The process of His creation hath had no beginningand can have no end, otherwise it would necessi-tate the cessation of His celestial grace. Godhath raised up Prophets and revealed Books asnumerous as the creatures of the world, and willcontinue to do so to everlasting.477

Shaykh A mad’s doctrines on Islamic ontology andḥeschatology had a strong impact on the Báb’s approach towardthese questions.478 The basic issues of these two fields,discussed in the Shaykhí and Bábí works, appear to consti-tute the closest intellectual tie between the two systems.

In his discussion of the basic ontological questions,of the nature and attributes of God, the Báb asserts thatGod will “dwell within the mystery of His Own divineEssence”479 and is “exalted above the reach and ken of allcreated beings.”480 As Shaykh A mad substituted theḥrecognition of the imám for the recognition of God, the Báb

186

also states, “Know thou that in this world of being theknowledge of God can never be attained save through theknowledge of Him Who is the Dayspring of divine Reality[i.e., the prophet].”481 Thus, although for Shaykh A mad andḥthe Báb man cannot know God, take refuge in Him, or meetwith Him, he can achieve the equivalent with His prophet.

Similar to Shaykh A mad’s doctrine, the Báb maintainsḥthat God created all things by His will and the will byitself.482 The relationship between the will and theuniverse is compared to the relationship between fire andheat.483

Although in Shaykh A mad’s writings paradise and hellḥare interpreted literally, in accordance with the tradi-tional belief, as well as allegorically, in the writings ofthe Báb they only receive an allegorical interpretation.

The Báb writes:

There is no paradise, in the estimation of thebelievers in the Divine Unity, more exalted thanto obey God’s commandments, and there is no firein the eyes of those who have known God and Hissigns, fiercer than to transgress His laws andto oppress another soul, even to the extent ofa mustard seed.484

Elsewhere he writes:

There is no paradise more wondrous for anysoul than to be exposed to God’s Manifestationin His Day, to hear His verses and believe inthem, to attain His presence, which is naught butthe presence of God, to sail upon the sea of theheavenly kingdom of His good-pleasure, and to par-take of the choice fruits of the paradise of Hisdivine Oneness.485

In the Báb’s writings paradise and hell are given

187

different allegorical interpretations. In one place the Bábmaintains that paradise refers to those who believe in theBayán,486 i.e., the Báb’s Book; in another place, paradise isthe Bayán itself;487 whoever accepts it is in paradise, andwhoever denies it is in hell. In several cases the Bábrefers to paradise as being wherever the believers havebeen or are.488 He states that no hell is worse thanunbelief or the denial of a prophet.489 Whoever denies theBáb and refuses to take refuge in him shall not escape hell,and whoever has rejected the Bayán is already in hell.490

Shaykh A mad regarded Resurrection as the day of theḥadvent of the Qá’im. Although he also interpreted Resurrec-tion in accordance with the traditional belief of the Shí‘a,the Báb only interprets it as the day of the appearance of anew prophet. This interpretation is radically differentfrom what the Shí‘a understand in a purely material sense.The Báb’s most comprehensive explanation of his views onthe Resurrection occurs in his main book, the Persian Bayán.

It reads,

The substance of this chapter is this, that whatis intended by the Day of Resurrection is the Dayof the appearance of the Tree of divine Reality,491

but it is not seen that any one of the followersof Shí‘ih Islám hath understood the meaning ofthe Day of Resurrection; rather have they fanci-fully imagined a thing which with God hath noreality. In the estimation of God and accordingto the usage of such as are initiated into divinemysteries, what is meant by the Day of Resurrec-tion is this, that from the time of the appearanceof Him Who is the Tree of divine Reality, at what-ever period and under whatever name, until themoment of His disappearance, is the Day of Resur-rection.

188

For example, from the inception of the missionof Jesus—may peace be upon Him—till the day ofHis ascension was the Resurrection of Moses. Forduring that period the Revelation of God shoneforth through the appearance of that divine Reality,Who rewarded by His Word everyone who believedin Moses, and punished by His Word everyone whodid not believe; inasmuch as God’s Testimony forthat Day was that which He had solemnly affirmedin the Gospel. And from the inception of the Rev-elation of the Apostle of God—may the blessingsof God be upon Him—till the day of His ascensionwas the Resurrection of Jesus—peace be upon Him—wherein the Tree of divine Reality appeared inthe person of Mu ammad, rewarding by His Word every-ḥone who was not a believer in Jesus, and punishingby His Word everyone who was not a believer inHim. And from the moment when the Tree of theBayán appeared until it disappeareth is the Resur-rection of the Apostle of God, as is divinely fore-told in the Qur’án; the beginning of which waswhen two hours and eleven minutes had passed onthe eve of the fifth of Jamádívu’l-Avval, AH 1260(22 May 1844), which is the year 1270 of theDeclaration of the Mission of Mu ammad. This wasḥthe beginning of the Day of Resurrection of theQur’án, and until the disappearance of the Treeof divine Reality is the Resurrection of theQur’án.492

Later in the same chapter, he continues,

This notwithstanding that in the Qur’án the adventof the Day of Resurrection hath been promised untoall by God. For on that Day all men will be broughtbefore God and will attain His Presence; whichmeaneth appearance before Him Who is the Tree ofdivine Reality and attainment unto His presence;inasmuch as it is not possible to appear beforethe Most Holy Essence of God, nor is it conceiv-able to seek reunion with Him. That which is feas-ible in the matter of appearance before Him and ofmeeting Him is attainment unto the Primal Tree.493

And elsewhere in the same book he writes.

The Day of Resurrection is a day on which the sunriseth and setteth like unto any other day. Howoft hath the Day of Resurrection dawned, and thepeople of the land where it occurred did not learnof the event. Had they heard, they would not havebelieved, and thus they were not told!494

189

The impact of Shaykhí teachings manifested itself notonly in Bábí ideology but also in the conduct of thoseShaykhís who became followers of the Báb. In the Báb, theseShaykhís found the person Shaykh A mad had written about andḥwith whom he had had a close relationship in his dreams.These Shaykhís were now able to express to a human being whoactually lived among them the love and gratitude that theirteacher had expressed to the Hidden Imám. No wonder, then,that thousands of Bábís, of whom the most distinguished hadcome from a Shaykhí background, willingly endured the mosthorrible tortures and persecutions and sacrificed theirlives for the Báb.

190

191

192

193

Conclusion

In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries,a time of general decline in the intellectual creativity ofthe Shí‘í community in Iran, Iraq, and the Persian Gulf,Shaykh A mad A sá’í was determined to reform and revitalizeḥ ḥthe Shí‘í society by direct inspiration from the words ofthe Prophet and the Shí‘í imáms. This re-emphasis on thedoctrine of the imamate formed the essence of his ideology.The doctrine of imamate, which distinguished the Shí‘a fromthe Sunnís, states that the virtue and guidance of theProphet continues through the imáms so that mankind will notbe deprived of his divine guidance.

Of the various theological, philosophical, sociologicaland ritualistic aspects of the Shaykhí school, it wasintended in this work to focus on the theological aspects,particularly those doctrines formulated by Shaykh Aḥmad onbasic questions of Islamic ontology and eschatology, such asGod, His attributes, and His will and its relationship withcreation; resurrection; and return. Of course, the theolog-ical doctrines of Shaykh Aḥmad appeared within the intellec-tual horizons of Persian society and were influenced by itssocial, political and economic conditions. Further investi-gation is required to illuminate how and why the theologicaldoctrines of Shaykh Aḥmad, an Arab scholar, achievedpopularity and respect among some Persian groups and elitesat first, only to arouse opposition and become the target of

194

attack by some of the eminent Shí‘í ‘ulamá. Although in hisontological doctrines, Shaykh A mad opposed some of hisḥpredecessors, such as Ibn al-‘Arabí, Mullá adrá, and MulláṢMu sin Fay Káḥ ḍ shání, he nevertheless was influenced by themand, particularly through Mullá adrá, by Ibn Síná. Ṣ ShaykhA mad’s doctrines on the philosophical questions of creation,ḥGod’s will, and His relationship with the universe manifestobvious similarities to those of the Ismá‘ílís. ShaykhA mad’s understanding of the position of the ḥ imáms bringshim close to the Ghálís and the Mufawwi a, while terminologyḍand interpretation of the subtle body are reminiscent ofShiháb al-Dín Sohravardí and other Illuminists. His pietyand detachment from the material affairs of daily life, hisinspiration from the imáms in his dreams, and the love andannihilation of the will of the imáms, of which he speaksthroughout his works, characterize him as a úfí, but,Ṣunlike other úfís, he rejects the possibility of union withṢGod.

In spite of these similarities, to determine the exactareas of influence and the ways through which he wasinfluenced requires further study. To what extent thesocio-political conditions of the Persian Gulf, ‘Atabát,and Iran contributed to the intellectual development of theShaykhí school, the social role of the Shaykhís in thepolitical and intellectual changes that occurred in thesecond half of the nineteenth century, the social backgroundof those who were attracted to the Shaykhí school, of those

195

Shaykhís who converted to the Báb and of those who roseagainst him, are all challenging questions for students ofthe nineteenth century intellectual history of Iran.

Shaykh A mad’s original contribution was his synthesisḥof the two main schools of Shí‘í thought in the first halfof the nineteenth century—the Akhbárí and the U úlí.ṣNeither the dogmatic speculations of the Akhbárís, nor thescholastic discussions of the U úlís satisfied him; there-ṣfore, he took a position between these two groups.

The major task Shaykh A mad undertook was to reconcileḥrevelation and reason: the first represented by theAkhbárís, the second, by the U úlís. In his attempt he didṣnot give a preponderant weight to either side. He respectedman’s reason but never overlooked the importance of divineinspiration which man may receive through his prayers andascetic practices. He strongly believed in the Qur’án andthe Traditions of the imáms, but his belief in them did notprevent him from using his reason. In fact, he insistedthat there must be an absolute harmony between revelationand reason. In his efforts to discover that harmony,however, he did not rely upon his reason whenever it couldnot comprehend the logic of the word of God.

Shaykh Aḥmad was not primarily concerned with estab-lishing a new system of thought or a school different fromShí‘a. But the way in which he approached the religiousquestions and presented them was new and original. Hisapproach was an attempt to examine the Shí‘í beliefs from a

196

new perspective, but its source was firmly grounded withinthe Shí‘í framework and was regarded by others as theShaykhí school of thought within Shí‘í Islam.

While the ideology of Shaykh A mad in its entirety wasḥstrongly rooted in the Qur’án and Islamic Traditions, itdiffered from that of other Shí‘í scholars. The differencederived primarily from the way in which Shaykh A madḥinterpreted the Qur’án and the Islamic Traditions. It wasalso based on certain Traditions that were not widelyaccepted by the majority of Shí‘í thinkers.

Shaykh A mad challenged the views of the úfí Ibnḥ Ṣal-‘Arabí, the theologian Mullá Mu sin Fay , and the philo-ḥ ḍsopher Mullá adrá—three eminent scholars who dominatedṢthe Persian intellectual horizon in the nineteenth century.Shaykh A mad’s challenge was unique: unlike other writersḥon Shí‘í thought who had concentrated their attacks on onlyone of these groups, Shaykh A mad challenged all three.ḥShaykh A mad’s primary purpose for focusing attention on theḥideology of his predecessors was to draw the attention ofthose of his own generation who were sympathetic to them andalso to prepare his followers for what he perceived to be acrucial event in the future: the appearance of the Qá’im.This, indeed, was the most important, constructive, andinfluential contribution that he made, the essence of hislife’s work.

In his efforts to prepare his followers for theappearance of the Qá’im, Shaykh A mad laid the cornerstoneḥ

197

for a religious reform which was to appear after him in theform of the Bábí movement. Shaykh A mad did not intend toḥproduce a reform in Islamic law or the social order of Shí‘ísociety, but to reshape the Shí‘í attitude toward the adventof the Qá’im. For him the appearance of the Qá’im was theanswer to all questions and, therefore, the people must beprepared for the day of his advent, which, when it occurred,would be the source of happiness, prosperity, and salvation.

Shaykh A mad’s intellectual contribution to theḥgenerations that followed him was much greater than that ofhis predecessors. In particular, he offered to the peopleof his own time more than he had received from his father’sgeneration. Without Shaykh A mad’s intellectual contribu-ḥtion, the Báb could not have won the followers, popularity,and influence that he did.

198

Appendices

A: Writings of Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im on the Qá’imḥ ẓThe page numbers refer to the Fihrist, where a full descrip-

tion of each work will be found.

The works of Shaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ1. Risála-i Ja‘faríya, written for Mírzá Ja‘far Nawwab.

Question 7 (p. 222)2. Risála-i ‘I mat wa Raj‘atṣ , written for Prince Mu ammadḥ

‘Alí Mírzá (p. 242)3. Fá’ida, written for Shaykh Músá b. Mu ammad á’iḥ Ṣ gh

(p. 242)4. Risála-i Músawíya, written for Shaykh Músá Ba ráníḥ

(p. 244)5. Khu baṭ , a prayer of supplication for the Qá’im (p. 246)6. Khu baṭ , which contains a prayer of supplication for the

Qá’im (p. 245)7. Risála, written for Sayyid usayn b. ‘Abd al-Qáhir.Ḥ

Question 2 (p. 259)8. Risála-i Rashtíya, written for Mullá ‘Alí b. Mírzá Ján

Rashtí. Questions 12 and 28 (p. 260)9. Risála-i áli íyaṢ ḥ , written for Shaykh áli b. awq.Ṣ ḥ Ṭ

Question 16 (p. 262)10.Risála-i Qa ífíyaṭ , written for Shaykh A mad b. ḥ Shaykh

áli Qa ífí. Questions 39, 40 and 41 (p. 272)Ṣ ḥ ṭ11.Risála-i Qa ífíyaṭ (another work composed for the above

person). Question 6 (p. 279)

The works of Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí

His two main works, Shar al-Qa ída al-lámíyaḥ ṣ (Tabríz:lithography, 1272/1855) and Shar al-ḥ Khu ba al- utunjíyaṭ Ṭ (Tabríz: lithography 1270/1853) are the major sources forthe questions on the Qá’im. His other works on the subjectare as follows:

1. Risála, written for Shaykh Mu ammad b. ḥ Shaykh ‘Abd ‘Alí

199

Ál ‘Abd al-Jabbár Qa ífí (p. 314)ṭ2. Risála, written for ájj Makkí b. ájj ‘Abd AlláhḤ Ḥ

Ba rání. Question 2 (p. 315)ḥ3. Risála, written for Shaykh Mu ammad b. ḥ Shaykh usaynḤ

Ba rání. Questions 8 and 9 (p. 342)ḥ4. Risála, written for Mírzá Mu ammad Ibráhím Tabrízí.ḥ

Questions 1 and 2 (p. 348)5. Risála, written for an unknown questioner. Question 3

(page 349)6. Risála, written to answer several questions that he

received from I fahán. Question 3 (p. 353)ṣ7. Risála, written for an unknown questioner. Question 2

(p. 359)

200

B: The abjad system

List of letters and their numerical values

ا á 1 ى í 10 ق q 100

ب b 2 ك k 20 ر r 200

ج j 3 ل l 30 ش sh 300

د d 4 م m 40 ت t 400

ه h 5 ن n 50 ث th 500

و w 6 س s 60 خ kh 600

ز z 7 ع ‘ 70 ذ dh 700

ح ḥ 8 ف f 80 ض ḍ 800

ط ṭ 9 ص ṣ 90 ظ ẓ 900

غ gh 1000

201

Bibliography

I. Unpublished manuscript sourcesLos Angeles. University of California. Research

library. Special Collection Department. NearEastern Collection. Shaykhí Manuscript Collection.n. 4. “Will” Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí.

Tehrán. National Bahá’í Archive. 2013-F. “Risála-iU úl” Sayyid Ká im Raṣ ẓ shtí.

Tehrán. National Bahá’í Archive. 2016-F. “TheTreatise for Mírzá Mu ammad asan” Sayyid Ká imḥ Ḥ ẓRashtí.

Tehrán. National Bahá’í Archive. 2016-F. “U úl-iṣ‘Aqá’id” Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí.

Tehrán. National Bahá’í Archive. 2022-F. “DavázdahRisála az Shaykh A mad A sá’í”.ḥ ḥ

II. Published sources‘Abdu’l-Bahá, ‘Abbás. A Traveller’s Narrative Written

to Illustrate the Episode of the Báb. Trans-lated and edited by Edward Browne. London:Cambridge University Press, 1891.

Affifi, A. E. The Mystical Philosophy of Mu yidḥDín-Ibnul ‘Arabí. Cambridge: University Press,1939.

A sá’í, ḥ Shaykh A mad. ḥ ayát al-NafsḤ . Translated bySayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí. Tabríz: Dár al- ubá‘at al-ṬRi á’í, 1377/1957.ḍ

______. Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, 2 vols. Tabríz: lithography,

202

1273–76/1356–59.______. Shar al-‘Arḥ shíya. Tabríz: lithography, 1278/

1861.______. Shar al-Fawá’idḥ . Tabríz?: lithography, 1254/

1838.______. Shar al-Maḥ shá‘ir. Tabríz?: lithography, 1255/

1839.______. Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ . Tabríz: lithography,

1276/1859.al-A sá’í, Mu ammad b. ‘Alí. ḥ ḥ Masálik al-Afhám wa al-Núr

al-Munjí min al- alámẒ , known as al-Mujlí. Tehrán:al-Shaykh A mad al-ḥ Shírází, lithography, 1329/1911.

Akhbárí, Mírzá Mu ammad. ḥ Ma ádir al-Anwár fi al-ṣwa al-Akhbár. Baghdád: n.p., 1341/1922.

Algar, Hamid. Religion and State in Iran 1785–1906.Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Cali-fornia Press, 1969.

Alláh, Shaykh ‘Abd. Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh. Persiantranslation published by Mu ammad áhir ḥ Ṭ Khán.

‘Alláma al- illí, asan b. Sadíd al-Dín. Ḥ Ḥ Tab irat al-ṣMuta‘alimín fí A kám al-Dínḥ . Damascus: Ma ba‘atṭal-Itqán, 1342/1923.

al-‘Ámilí, asan b. Zayn al-Dín. Ḥ Ma‘álim al-U úlṣ .Tehrán: Shafí‘í, 1379/1960.

al-Amín, al-Sayyid Mu sin. ḥ A‘yán al-Shí‘a, 4th ed.Beirut: Ma ba‘at al-In áf, 1960.ṭ ṣ

al-‘Ayyáshí, Mu ammad b. Mas‘úd. ḥ Kitáb al-Tafsír.Qom: ‘Ilmíya, 1961.

The Báb, Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad. ḥ Persian Bayán. n.p.:

203

lithography, n.d.______. Selections from the Writings of the Báb. Trans-

lated by Habib Taherzadeh. Haifa: Bahá’í WorldCentre, 1976.

al-Baghdádí, Abú Man úr‘Abd al-Qádir b. áhir. ṣ Ṭ al-FarqBayn al-Firaq. Tehrán: Amír Kabír, SH 1344.

Ba rayní, ḥ Shaykh Yúsuf. adá’iq al-Ná ira fí A kám al-Ḥ ḍ ḥ‘Itrat al- áhiraṬ , 6 vols. Tabríz: Dár ubá‘atṬ

ájj Ibráhím al-Tabrízí, 1899–1900.Ḥ______. Lu’lu’at al-Ba raynḥ . Najaf: Ma ba‘at al-Nu‘mán,ṭ

1966.Bámdád, Mehdí. Shar -i ál-i Rijál-i Iránḥ Ḥ , 6 vols.

Tehrán: Zawwár, SH 1347–51.______. Táríkh-i Rijál-i Irán, 6 vols.

Tehrán: Zawwár, SH 1247–1351.Behbahání, Mu ammad Báqir. ḥ Risála dar Ijtihád va

Akhbár. Tehrán?: n.p., 1314/1896.Browne, Edward G., ‘The Bábís of Persia. II. Their

Literature and Doctrines”. The Journal of theRoyal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland21 (1889): 881–1009.

______. The Kitáb-i Nuq atu’l-Káfṭ . Leyden: Brill, 1910.______. A Literary History of Persia, 4 vols, Cambridge:

The University Press, 1959.al-Bursí, Shaykh Rajab. Masháriq Anwár al-Yaqín fí

aqá’iq (KaḤ shf) Asrár Amír al-Mu’minín. Beirut:n.p., 1379/1959.

Chahárdehí, Murta á Mudarrisí. “ ájj Mu ammad Karímḍ Ḥ ḥKhán Kermání”, pp. 173–204 in Símáy-i Bozorgán,

204

Tehrán: Amír Kabír, SH 1335.______. Shaykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ . Tehrán: ‘Ilmí, SH 1334.______. “Shaykh A mad Aḥ ḥsá’í”, Yádár 1:4 (Jan. 1944): 30–47.______. Shaykhígary, Bábígary az Na ar-i Falásafa, Táríẓ kh

va Ijtimá‘. Tehrán: Furúghí, 1345/1966.______. Táríkh-i Falásifa-i Islám. Tehrán: ‘Ilmí, SH 1336.Corbin, Henry. L’École Shaykhie en Théologie Shií‘ite.

Tehrán: Tábán, 1967.Curzon, George N. Persia and the Persian Questian, 2

vols. London: Green and Longmans, 1892.Davvání, ‘Alí. Ostád-i Kull, Áqá Mu ammad Báqir b.ḥ

Mu ammad Akmal Ma‘rúf bi Wa íd-i Behbaháníḥ ḥ . Qom:Dár al-‘Ilm, 1378/1958.

Dehkhodá, ‘Alí Akbar. Lughat Náma-i Dehkhodá. Tehrán:Majlis, 1947—

The Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd edn. 1954–2005.Fá il Mázandarání, Mírzá Asad Alláh. ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ .

Tehrán: n.p., n.d.Farmayan, Hafez. “Observations on Sources for the

Study of Nineteenth- and Twentieth-CenturyIranian History”, IJMES, 5 (Jan. 1974): 32–49.

Fat í, Nu rat Alláh. ḥ ṣ Majmú‘a-i Áthár-i Qalamí-iShádraván Thiqat al-Islám-i Shahíd-i Tabrízí.Tehrán: Anjoman-i Áthár-i Millí, SH 1354.

______. Zendegí Náma-i Shahíd-i Níknám Thiqat al-IslámTabrízí. Tehrán: Bonyád-i Níkokárí-i Núriyání,SH 1352.

205

Gobineau, Comte Arthur de. Les religions et lesphilosophies dans l’Asie Central. Paris: ErnestLeroux, 1900.

______. Trois ans en Asie. Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1922.Hidáyat, Ri á Qolí ḍ Khán. Raw at al- afá-i Ná iríḍ Ṣ ṣ , 10

vols. Qom: Markazí, Khayyám, Píroz, 1339/1960.Himmat, Mu ammad. ḥ Táríkh-i Mufa al-i Kermánṣṣ . Kermán:

Himmat, SH 1350.Hughes, Thomas Patrick. Dictionary of Islam. 1885.

Reprint. New Delhi: Oriental Books Reprint Co.,1976.

al- urr al-‘Ámilí, Mu ammad b. asan. Ḥ ḥ Ḥ Wasá’il al-Shí‘aIlá Ta íl Masá’il al-ḥṣ Sharí‘a. Tehrán: Maktabatal-Islámíya, 1376/1957.

al- usayní al Mázandarání, Mírzá Mu ammad usayn.Ḥ ḥ ḤTanbíh al-Anám ‘alá Mafásid Ta’líf al-Kermání al-Mausúm bi Irshád al-‘Awám. Tabríz: lithography,n.d.

______. Tiryáq-i Fárúq. Mashhad: lithography, 1308/1890.Ibn Ajurrúm, Mu ammad b. Mu ammad. ḥ ḥ Ajurrúmíya fí

Qawá’id ‘Ilm al-Arabíya. Túnis: Ma ba‘at al-ṭDawlat al-Túnisíya, 1867–1873.

Ibn Bábawayh, Mu ammad b. ‘Alí. ḥ Amálí al- adúqṢ . Najaf:al-Ma ba‘at al- aydaríya, 1970.ṭ Ḥ

______. al-Khi álṣ . Najaf: al-Ma ba‘at al- aydaríya, 1971.ṭ Ḥ______. Man Lá Ya uruh al-Faqíhḥḍ , 4 vols. Najaf: Dár al-

Islámíya, 1377–78/1957–58.

206

______. ‘Uyún Akhbár al-Ri áḍ . Tehrán: lithography,1297/1880.

Ibráhímí, Abú al-Qásim. Fihrist-i Kutub-i Masháyikh-i‘I ámẓ , 3d ed. Kermán: Sa‘ádat, n.d.

Ishráq Khávarí, ‘Abd al- amíd. Ḥ Ra íq-i Maḥ khtúm, 2 vols.Tehran: Mu’assisa-i Millí-i Ma bú‘át-i Amrí, 1973.ṭ

Jamál Zádeh, Sayyid Mu ammad ‘Alí. “ḥ Shuyúkh-iSilsila-i Shaykhíya”, Yaghmá. 14 (SH 1340): 402–409; 440–448; 487–493; 538–543.

Jurjání, Mír Sayyid Sharíf. “Amthila”, Jámi‘ al-Muqadamát. Tehrán: ‘Ilmíya Islámíya, lithography,1366/1946.

______. “ arf Mír”. Ṣ Jámi‘ al-Muqadamát. Tehrán: ‘IlmíyaIslámíya, lithography, 1366/1946.

Karímán, usayn. Ḥ abrisí, va Majma‘ al-BayánṬ , 2 vols.Tehrán: Tehrán University, SH 1340.

al-Kashmírí, Mu ammad ‘Alí. ḥ Nujúm al-Samá fí Tarájimal-‘Ulamá. Qom: Ba íratí, 1394/1974.ṣ

Kasraví, A mad. ḥ Baháyigarí, 2d ed. Tehrán: Páydár,n.d.

______. Táríkh-i Mashrú a-i Iránṭ . Tehrán: Amír Kabír,SH 1349.

Kayván, ‘Abbás ‘Alí. ájj NámaḤ . Tehrán: Bosfor, 1308/1929.

Kermání, ájj Mu ammad Ḥ ḥ Khán. Hidáyat al-Mustarshid.n.p., 1312/1894.

Kermání, ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán. Hidáyat al- álibínṬ .

207

2nd edn. Kermán: Sa‘ádat, 1380/1960.______. Irshád al-‘Awám, 4 vols. Kermán: Sa‘ádat, 1934–36.______. Izháq al-Bá il dar Radd-i Báb-i Murtábṭ . Kermán:

n.p., 1351/1932.______. Risála-i Behbaháníya. Kermán: Sa‘ádat, SH 1351.______. Risála-i Radd-i Báb-i Murtáb. Kermán: Sa‘ádat,

1384/1964.______. Shiháb-i Tháqib. Kermán: n.p., 1353/1934.______. “Tír-i Shiháb dar Radd-i Báb-i Khusrán Ma’áb”.

in Majma‘ al-Rasá’il. Kermán: Sa‘ádat, 1386/1966.al-Khorásání, Mullá Mu ammad Kḥ á im. ẓ Kifáyat al-U úlṣ ,

2 vols. Tehrán: Mírzá A mad al- ehrání, 1342/ḥ Ṭ1923.

al-Kolayní, Mu ammad b. Ya‘qúb. ḥ al-Uṣúl min al-Káfí,4 vols. Tehrán: al-Maktabat al-Islámíya,1382–86/1962–66.

Maftún-i Donbolí, ‘Abd al-Razzáq. M’áthir-i Sulṭáníya.Edited by Ghulám usayn adrí AfḤ Ṣ shár. Tehrán:Ibn-i Síná, 1392/1972.

Ma fú , usayn ‘Alí. ḥ ẓ Ḥ irá al-Ṣ ṭ Shaykh A mad al-A sḥ ḥ á’í.Baghdád: Ma ba‘at al-Ma‘ṭ árif, 1957.

Majlisí, Mu ammad Báqir. ḥ Bi ar al-Anwarḥ . Tehrán: al-Maktabat al-Islámíya, 1384/1964. Volume 13appeared in three parts: 51, 52, and 53.

Ma‘ úm ‘Alí ṣ Sháh, Mu ammad Ma‘ úm ḥ ṣ Shírází, “Náyib al-adr”. Ṣ arṬ á’iq al- aqḤ á’iq, 3 vols. Edited by

Mu ammad Ja‘far Ma júb. Tehrḥ ḥ án: Bárání, SH 1345.Mishkát al-Díní, ‘Abd al-Mu sin. ḥ Na arí bi Falsafa-iẓ

208

adr al-Dín-i Ṣ Shírází “Mullá adráṢ ”. Tehrán:Bonyád-i Farhang-i Irán, SH 1345.

Mu‘allim abíbábádí, Mu ammad ‘Alí. Ḥ ḥ Makárim al-Áthár.I fahán: Mu ammadí, 1377/1957.ṣ ḥ

Mudarris, Mu ammad ‘Alí. ḥ Ray ánat al-Adab fí Tarájimḥal-Ma‘rúfín bi al-Kunyat wa al-Laqab yá Kunná waAlqáb, 8 vols. Tehrán: Khayyam, 1346/1967.

Mu‘ín, Mu ammad. “Havarqalyá”, ḥ Majalla-i Dáneshkada-iAdabíyát, vol. 1 (SH 1333): 78–105.

al-Músawí al-I bahání, Mu ammad Báqir. ṣ ḥ Raw át al-ḍJannát fí A wál al-‘Ulamá wa al-Sádátḥ , 8 vols.Tehrán: Ismá‘ílíyán, 1390/1970.

Mu li , Jawád. ṣ ḥ Mabda’-i Áfarínesh az Dídgáh-iFalásifa-i Islám. Tehrán: Tehran University,SH 1354.

Najafí, Shaykh Ja‘far. al- aqq al-Mubín fi al-RaddḤ‘ala al-Akhbáriyín. Tehrán: lithography, 1319/1901.

______. Kashf al-Ghi áṭ . Tehrán?: lithography, Ma ba‘atṭMu ammad Báqir, 1271/1854.ḥ

al-Najafí, Shaykh Mu ammad asanḥ Ḥ . Jawáhir al-Kalám fíShar ḥ Sharáyi‘ al-Islám. Najaf: Dár al-Kutub al-Islámíya, 1378/1958.

Nayyir, Mamaqání, Mírzá Mu ammad Taqí. ḥ á ífat al-Ṣ ḥAbrár. Tabríz: lithography, 1319/1901.

Nicolas, A. L. M. Essai Sur Le Chéikhisme. Vol. 1:Cheikh A med Lahçahi. Vol. 2: Séyyèd Kazemḥ

209

Rechti. Vol. 3: La Doctrine. Vol. 4: LaScience de Dieu. Paris: Paul Geuthner: 1910–14.

al-Qazvíní, Ibrahim b. Mu ammad Báqir. ḥ awábi al-Ḍ ṭU úlṣ . Tehrán?: lithography, 1271/1854.

Qolawayh, Ja‘far b. Mu ammad. ḥ Kámil al-Ziyára or Jámi‘al-Ziyára. Najaf: lithography, 1356/1937.

al-Qomí, Abú al-Qásim b. Mu ammad asan. ḥ Ḥ al-Qawánínal-Mu kamaḥ . Tehrán?: lithography, 1340.

al-Ra awí al-ḍ Sharíf, Ni‘mat Alláh. Tadhkirat al-Awliyá.Bombay: n.p., 1313/1895.

Rashtí, Sayyid Ká im. ẓ Collection of Treatises. Tabríz:lithography, 1276/1954.

______. Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ . Najaf: n.p., 1364/1944.______. Shar al-ḥ Khu ba al- utunjíyaṭ Ṭ . Tabríz: litho-

graphy, 1270/1853.______. Shar al-Qa ída al-Lámíyaḥ ṣ . Tabríz: lithography,

1272/1855.Saní‘ al-Dawla, Mu ammad asan ḥ Ḥ Khán. Ma la‘ al-ṭ Shams,

3 vols. Tehrán: n.p., 1301–03/1883–86.Schimmel, Annemarie. Mystical Dimension of Islam.

Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,1978.

Sepehr, Mu ammad Taqí Lisán al-Mulk. ḥ Násikh al-Tawáríkh, Dawra-i Kámil-i Táríkh-i Qájáríya.Edited by Jahángír Qá’im Maqámí. Tehrán: AmírKabír, SH 1337.

Shafí‘í, Mu ammad. ḥ Mufassirín-i Shí‘a. Tehrán:

210

Pahlavi University, SH 1349.Sharíf Astarábádí, Mullá Mu ammad Amín. ḥ al-Fawá’id al-

Madaníya. Tabríz: lithography, 1321/1903.Shírvání, Zayn al-‘Ábidín. Bustán al-Siyáha. Tehrán:

Kárkhána-i abíb Alláh, 1897.ḤShoghi Effendi. Translated and edited. The Dawn-

Breakers: Nabíl’s Narrative of the Early Days ofThe Bahá’í Revelation. Wilmette, Ill.: Bahá’íPublishing Trust, 1974.

______. God Passes By. Wilmette, Ill.: Bahá’í PublishingTrust, 1970.

Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, Leiden: Brill, 1953.Steingass, F. A Comprehensive Persian-English Diction-

ary. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.al- abrisí, al-Fa l b. al- asan. Ṭ ḍ Ḥ Majma‘ al-Bayán, 6

vols. Beirut: Dár Maktabat al- ayát, 1961.Ḥal-Taftázání, Sa‘d al-Dín. al-Mu awwalṭ . Tehrán: Dár

al- ubá‘a Mírzá Mu ammad usayn, lithography,Ṭ ḥ Ḥ1316/1898.

áhir. Riyá . Ṭ ḍ Fihrist Tasáníf al-‘Alláma al-ShaykhA mad al-A sá’íḥ ḥ . Karbalá: al- á’iríya, n.d.Ḥ

al- ehrání, Áqá Bozorg. Ṭ al-Dharí‘a ilá Ta áníf al-ṣShí‘a. 26 vols. Tehrán: Majlis, Najaf:Ma ba‘at al-Qa á, ṭ ḍ 1375–/1956–1293–1389/1876–1970.

Thiqat al-Islám Tabrízí, ájj Mírzá ‘Alí. Ḥ Risála-iLálán. Istanbul: n.p., 1326/1908.

Tonekáboní, Mu ammad. ḥ Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ . Tehrán:

211

Kitáb Furúshí ‘Ilmíya Islámíya, n.d.Tosí, Mu ammad b. asan. ḥ Ḥ Tahdhíb al-A kámḥ , 10 vols.

Najaf: Dár al-Kutub al-Islámíya, 1958.al- uray í, FaṬ ḥ khr al-Dín b. Mu ammad. ḥ Majma‘ al-

Ba raynḥ . Tehrán: Jár Alláhí, 1379/1959.Wá‘i -i ẓ Khiyábání, Mullá ‘Alí. Kitáb-i ‘Ulamá-i

Mu‘á irínṣ . Tehrán: Islámíya, 1366/1946.Wehr, Hans. A Dictionary of Modern Writtening Arabic.

Edited by Milton Cowan. New York: SpokenLanguage Services, 1976.

Williams, John Alden. Themes of Islamic Civilization.Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971.

Wilson, B. R. “A Typology of Sects”. Sociology ofReligion. Edited by Roland Robertson. GreatBritain: Penguin Education, 1969.

212

1NotesThe term “Shaykhí”, the adjective from the word “Shaykh”,

is derived from the title of Shaykh A mad A sá’í.ḥ ḥ2 B. R. Wilson, “A Typology of Sects”, p. 364.3 ibid., p. 365.4 ibid., p. 366.5 ibid., p. 367.6 ibid., p. 368.7 ibid., p. 369.8 Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “al-Murdj’a”, by A. J. Wensinck.9 ibid., s.v. “al-Mu‘tazila”, by H. S. Nyberg.10 ibid., s.v. “Kháridjites”, by G. levi della Vida.11 ibid., s.v. “al-Zaidíya”, by R. Strothmann.12 ibid., s.v. “Málikís”, by W. Heffening.13 ibid., s.v. “ anafites”, by W. Heffening.Ḥ14 Abú Man úr ‘Abd al-Qádir al-Baṣ ghdádí, al-Farq Bayn al-

Firaq, p. 3.15 Hafez Farmayan remarks that, “No period in Persian

History is so rich in source materials as that of therecent Qájár (1794–1925).” “Observations on Sources forthe Study of Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century IranianHistory”, No. 1, p. 41.

16Notes‘Atabát, literally, “threshholds”, refers to the Shí‘í

cities in Iraq, namely, Karbalá, Ká imayn, Najaf, andẓSámarrá.

17 For further information about the curriculum and thelife of the religious circles see ‘Abbás ‘Alí Kayván, ájjḤNáma, pp. 98–100; Mu ammad asan ḥ Ḥ Khán aní‘ al-Dawla,ṢMa la‘ al-Shams, vol. 2, pp. 31–32; Comte Arthur de Gobineau,ṭLes religions et les philosophies dans l’Asie Central, p. 105.

18 Mu ammad ‘Alí Mu‘allim abíbábádí, Makárim al-Áḥ Ḥ thár,vol. 1, p. 84.

19 For a typical ijáza, see that of Mullá ‘Alí Wá‘i -i ẓ Khiyábáníin the Kitáb-i ‘Ulamá-i Mu‘á irínṣ , pp. 408–409.

20 For example, in the families of abá abá’í, Behbahání,Ṭ ṭand Káshif al-Ghi á, a few individuals reached theṭhighest rank of leadership.

21 E. G. Browne states that, “The literature produced bythis large and industrious body of men (‘ulamá), bothin Arabic and Persian, is naturally enormous, but thebulk of it is so dull or so technical that no one but avery leisured and very pious Shí‘a scholar would dreamof reading it. The author of the Qi a u’l-‘Ulamáṣ ṣremarks that the ‘ulamá often live to a very advancedage, and as their habits are, as a rule, sedentary andstudious, and they devote a large portion of their timeto writing, it is not unusual to find a single authorcredited with one or two hundred books and pamphlets.”(A Literary History of Persia, vol. 4, pp. 376–377.

22 Mu‘allim abíbḤ ábádí, Makárim al-Áthár, p. 86.23 ibid., p. 213.24 E. G. Browne states that, “Many of these writings are

utterly valueless, consisting of notes or glosses onsuper commentaries or commentaries on texts, grammati-cal, logical, juristic or otherwise, which texts arecompletely buried and obscured by all this misdirectedingenuity and tail.” A Literary History of Persia, p. 377.

25 Mu‘allim abíbábádí, Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, pp. 87–90.26 usayn Karímán shows that the term abrisí is theḤ Ṭ

Arabized form of the Persian word Tafresh. abrisí,Ṭhowever, is commonly mispronounced abarsí. See usaynṬ ḤKarímán, abrisí va Majma‘ al-BayánṬ , vol. 1, pp. 166–187.

27 For an annotated bibliography of the books of tafsírsee Mu ammad ḥ Shafí‘í, Mufassirín-i Shí‘a, pp. 159–182.

28 For a detailed description of the functions of the‘ulamá see Hamid Algar, Religion and State in Iran 1785–1906,pp. 11–14.

29 Kh ums is a religious tax paid to the family of theProphet and after him to his successors, i.e., theimáms. After the occultation of the Twelfth Imám the‘ulamá have been receiving the khums as the representa-tives of the imáms in the Shí‘í community.

30 For a description of the Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh’s religiousattitudes see Ri á Qolí ḍ Khán Hidáyat, Raw at al- afá-iḍ ṢNá iríṣ , vol. 10, p. 106; and Mu ammad Taqí Lisánḥal-Mulk-i Sepehr, Násikh al-Tawárkíh, Dawra-iKámil-i Táríkh-i Qájáríya, pp. 188–189, 214–215.

31 Mu‘allim abibábádí, Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, p. 85.32 Gobineau, Les religions et les philosophies dans l’Asie

Central, p. 96.33 ‘Abd al-Razzáq Maftún-i Donbolí, M’áthir Sul áníyaṭ , p. 140.34 According to Násikh al-Tawáríkh (p. 214) one dirham is

equal to thirty-six nokhod of silver and one dínár is equalto eighteen nokhod of gold. Nine dirham is equal toone dínár and one dínár plus one dirham is equal toone tomán.

35 Mu ammad ‘Alí al-Kaḥ shmírí, Nujúm al-Samá fí Tarájimal-‘Ulamá, p. 368.

36 Comte Arthur de Gobineau, Trois ans en Asia, p. 42.37 Mu ammad Báqir al-Músawí al-I bahání, ḥ ṣ Raw at al-Jannátḍ

fí A wál al-‘Ulamá wa al-Sádátḥ , vol. 1, p. 121.38 ‘Alí Davvání, Ostád-i Kull, Áqá Mu ammad Báqir b.ḥ

Mu ammad Akmal Ma‘rúf bi Wa íd Behbaháníḥ ḥ , p. 96.39 Mujtahid: “A legist formulating independent decisions

in legal or theological matters, based on the interpre-tation and application of the four u úlṣ (Qur’án, Sunna,Qiyás “analogy” or ‘Aql “reason” in the Shí‘í view, andijmá‘ “consensus”), as opposed to muqallid (Hans Wehr,A Dictionary of Modern writtening Arabic, p. 143.).

40 al-Kashmírí, Nujúm al-Samá, p. 42.41 Mu ammad ‘Alí Mudarris, ḥ Ray ánat al-Adab fí Tarájim al-ḥ

Ma‘rúfín bi al-Kunyat wa al-Laqab yá Kunna wa Alqáb, vol. 4,p. 377.

42 Mullá ‘Alí Wá‘iz-i Khiyábání, Kitáb-i ‘Ulamá-iMu‘á irínṣ , p. 283.

43 al-Músawí al-I bahání, ṣ Raw át al-Jannátḍ , vol. 7, pp.96–106.

44 ‘Alí Davvání, Ostád-i Kull, p. 98.45 al-Músawí al-I bahání, ṣ Raw át al-Jannátḍ , vol. 4, p. 250.46 The title of this work is given as al-Durar al-

Najafíya fi al-Multaqi at al-Yúsufíyaṭ in Mu ammadḥ‘Alí Mudarris, Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 3, p. 360.

47 Mu ammad ‘Alí Mudarris, ḥ Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 1, pp.85–86.

48 ibid.49 Mu‘allim abíbáhádí, Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, p. 222.50 Ijtihád: “Independent judgment in a legal or theolog-

ical question, based on the interpretation andapplication of the four u úlṣ , as opposed to taqlíd.”Wehr, A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, p. 143.

51 Mu‘allim abíbábádí, Ḥ Makarim al-Áthár, p. 234.52 The title of the work is given as al- aqq al-Mubín fíḤ

Ta wíb al-Mujtahidín wa Taṣ kh i’at Juhhál al-Aṭ khbáríyínin Mu ammad ‘Alí Mudarris, ḥ Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 5,p. 24.

53 al-Músawí al-I bahání, ṣ Raw át al-Jannátḍ , vol. 2,pp. 200–206.

54 Algar, Religion and State in Iran, pp. 35–36.55 Kayván, ájj NámaḤ , p. 127.56 For a list of the polemic works see Áqá Bozorg al-

ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a ilá Ta áníf al-ṣ Shí‘a, vol. 10, pp. 182–183.57 al-Músawí al-I bahání, ṣ Raw át al-Jannátḍ , vol. 7, p. 145.58 Sayyid Mu ammad abá abá’í was the son of Sayyid ‘Alíḥ Ṭ ṭ

abá abá’í and the son-in-law of Sayyid Mu ammad MahdíṬ ṭ ḥBa r al-‘Ulúm. The son of Sayyid Mu ammad abá abá’í,ḥ ḥ Ṭ ṭSayyid usayn, married the daughter of Ḥ Shaykh al-Mulk

who was the son of Fat ‘Alí ḥ Sháh. This shows therelation by marriage of the U úlís and the royal family.ṣ(See ‘Alí Davvání, Ostád-i Kull, pp. 345, 356.)

59 For a full discussion of points of disputes between theAkhbárís and the U úlís, see al-Músawí al-I bahání,ṣ ṣRaw át al-Jannátḍ , vol. 1, pp. 127–130.

60 A book written during this period about the qualifica-tions of a mujtahid is the Jámi‘ al-Funún by MulláMu ammad Ja‘far Astarábádí.ḥ

61 “In the usual classification of Muslim sciences, theu úl al-fi hṣ ḳ (‘ilm al-u úlṣ ) are generally defined asthe methodology of Muslim jurisprudence, as the scienceof the proofs which lead to the establishment of legalstandards in general.” (Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam,s.v. “U úl”, by J. Schacht.).ṣ

62NotesThe following are the major sources: Ma ammad Báqirḥ

al-Músawí al-I bahání, ṣ Raw át al-Jannát fí A wál al-ḍ ḥ‘Ulamá wa al-Sádát, 8 vols. (Tehrán: Ismá‘ílíyan,1390/1970), vol. 1, pp. 88–94; Mu ammad ‘Alí Mudarris,ḥRay ánat al-Adabḥ (Tehrán: Khayyám, 1967), vol. 1,pp. 78–82; and al-Sayyid Mu sin al-Amín, ḥ A‘yán al-Shí‘a(Beirut: Ma ba‘at al-In áf, 1960), vol. 8, pp. 272–282.ṭ ṣ

63 See in The Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “al-A sá’í” byḥA. Bausani; Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v.“Shaíkhí” by C. Huart; ‘Alí Akbar Dehkhodá, LuqhatNáma-i Dehkhodá, s.v. “A mad A sá’í”.ḥ ḥ

64 Abú al-Qásim Ibráhímí, Fihrist-i Kutub-i Masháyikh-i‘I ámẓ , pp. 132–143.

65 usayn ‘Alí Ma fúḤ ḥ ẓ, Síraṭ al-Shaykh A mad al-A sá’í,ḥ ḥpp. 9–22.

66 This translation was published along with the Risála-iTadhkirat al-Awliya in Kermán in 1383/1967. Referencesto this translation are made under the title ofRisála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh throughout this work.

67 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ .68 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 311.69 ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, Hidáyat al- álibínṬ .70 Murta á Mudarrisí ḍ Chahárdehí, Shaykhígarí, Bábígarí az

Na ar-i Falsafa, Táríẓ kh va Ijtimá‘.71 Murta á Mudarrisí Chahárdehí, ḍ Shaykh A mad A sá’í.ḥ ḥ

This work, with very little addition, was republished inTáríkh-i Falásifa-i Islám; “Shaykh A mad A sá’í”, ḥ ḥ Yádgárvol. 1, no. 4; “ ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání”.

72 Jamál Zádeh’s articles were published in Yachmá,vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 402–409; no. 10, pp. 440–448;no. 11, pp. 488–493; no. 12, pp. 538–543. The seriesended with the biography of the fifth leader, Zaynal-‘Ábidín Khán Kermání.

73 A. L. M. Nicolas, Essai Sur Le Chéikhisme. Vol. 1:Cheikh A med Lahçahi. Vol. 2: Séyyèd Kazem Rechti.ḥVol. 3: La Doctrine. Vol. 4: La Science de Dieu.

74 de Gobineau, Les Religions et les Philosophies.pp. 23–39.

75 Edward G. Browne, “The Bábis of Persia. II. TheirLiterature and Doctrines”, pp. 884–885, 883–892. Inhis introduction to the Kitáb-i Nuq atu’l-Káfṭ , pp. xx-xxiii;Browne briefly discusses the major beliefs of the Shaykhís.

76 ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, A Traveller’s Narrative, vol. 2, pp. 234–244.77 The work, with its translation into Persian by

Fereydoun Bahmanyar, was published in Tehrán in 1967.78 Ibráhimí, Fihrist, p. 132.79 According to Zayn al-‘Ábidín Shírvání in his Bustán

al-Siya aḥ , p. 522, A sá is the original name of the country,ḥbut it is also called as La sa and asá. Thus the peopleḥ Ḥof the county are known as La sáwí or asáwí as well asḥ ḤA sá’í.ḥ

80 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, pp. 17–18.

81 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 132.82 ibid., p. 133.83 ibid.84 ibid., p. 136.85 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 8.86 al-Ajurrúmíya fí Qawá’id ‘Ilm al-‘Arabíya, a textbook

in Arabic grammar, written by Abú ‘Abd Alláh Mu ammadḥb. Mu ammad Ibn Ajurrúm: the ḥ ‘Awámil, a textbook inArabic grammar, written by ‘Abd al-Qáhir b. ‘Abd al-Ra mán al-Jurjání.ḥ

87 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 136.88 Ch ahárdehí, Táríkh-i Falásifa-i Islam, p. 62.89 The complete title of the book is Masálik al-Afhám wa

al-Núr al-Munjí min al- alámẒ , known as al-Mujlí.90 Mu ammad Ma‘ úm ḥ ṣ Shírází, known as Ma‘ úm ‘Alí ṣ Sháh and

Náyib al- adr, Ṣ Tará’iq al- aqá’iqḤ , vol. 3, p. 217.91 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 18.92 Mudarris, Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 1, p. 79.93 Tab iraṣ is one of the main works of ‘Alláma al- illí.Ḥ94 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 18.95 For Mu ammad Mahdí Ba r al-‘Ulúm’s ḥ ḥ ijáza see ájjḤ

Mu ammad ḥ Khán Kermání’s Risála-i Behbaháníya,pp. 23–24; ájj Mu ammad Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání’sHidáyat al-Mustarshid, pp. 59–60; and Sayyid Ká imẓRashtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 39.

96 For usayn ‘Alí ‘U fúr’s Ḥ ṣ ijáza see Risála-i Behbaháníya,p. 26; Hidáyat al-Mustarshid, p. 56; and Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 40. According to Makárir al-Áthár(vol. 2, p. 572) this ijáza was issued on the second ofJumádá al-Thání 1214/1799.

97 A portion of Shaykh A mad Damistání’s ḥ ijáza waspublished in Hidàyat al-Mustarshid, p. 57.

98 For Shahrestání’s ijáza see Risála-i Behbaháníya,pp. 24–25; Hidáyat al-Mustarshid, pp. 57–58; andDalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 39.

99 For abá abá’í’s Ṭ ṭ ijáza see Risála-i Behbaháníya, p. 27;Hidáyat al-Mustarshid, pp. 58–59; and Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 41.

100 For Shaykh Ja‘far Najafí’s ijáza see Risála-iBehbaháníya, p. 25; Hidáyat al-Mustarshid, pp. 60–61;and Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 40.

101 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 150.102 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 20. See

also ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, Hidáyat al-álibínṬ , pp. 63–65.

103 Mudarris, Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , p. 79.104 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 133.105 ibid., p. 140.106 ibid.107 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 13.108 Ibrihímí, Fihrist, p. 141.109 ájj Mu ammad Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, Risála-i Behbaháníya,

pp. 11–12.110 ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, Hidáyat al- álibínṬ ,

p. 41.111 ibid., p. 43.112 In the Ray ánat al-Adabḥ two phrases are recorded which

have numerical values of 1242, for first:احمد الدین زین ابن یا فوزا بالفردوس :and the second فزتاحمد الشیخ Ray) رحم ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 2, p. 81).

113 For detailed information about the members of theShaykh’s family see Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh,pp. 41–42.

114 al-Mírzá Mu ammad ‘Alí al-Kaḥ shmírí, Nujúm al-Samá fíTarájim al-‘Ulamá, p. 368.

115 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 23.116 ibid., p. 34.117 ibid., p. 37.118 ibid., p. 39.

119 A complete report on the nature of this dispute and itsconsequences is given in Mu ammad Tonekáboní’s ḥ Qi aṣ ṣal-‘Ulamá, pp. 34–43.

120 A mad Kasraví, ḥ Baháyígarí, p. 18.121 For a full description of the conduct of Shaykh A madḥ

see ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání’s Hídáyat al-álibínṬ , p. 84.

122 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , pp. 14–15.123 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 141.124 ibid.125 A full discussion of the Shaykh’s sources would be a

significant task requiring a great deal of research.It is not intended here to study his sources ofknowledge and information or even to provide a fulllist of works used by the Shaykh. On the basis of hismajor works such as Shar al-Ziyáraḥ , it is obvious thathe made much use of the well-known Shí‘í collections ofTraditions. U úl al-Káfíṣ of Kolayní (d. 329/940),al-Amálí, al-Khi álṣ , and ‘Uyún Akhbár al-Ri áḍ , threemajor works of adúq are quoted often. Ṣ Shaykh A madḥalso frequently refers to the works of Fa l b. asan b.ḍ ḤFa l abrisí (d. 548/1153) such as ḍ Ṭ Majma‘ al-Bayán andal-Wáfí. Among the exegesises on the Qur’án, ShaykhA mad is fond of those that contain the Traditionsḥconcerning qualities and attributes of the imáms. Herefers to Tafsír al-‘Ayyáshí by Mu ammad b. Mas‘úd b.ḥMu ammad b. ‘Ayyáḥ sh and the exegesis of Mírzá Mu ammadḥb. Mullá Mu ammad Ri á Jamálal-Dín Qomí entitled theḥ ḍKanz al-Daqá’iq wa Ba r al-ḥ Ghará’ib, which both containthe Traditions on the imáms. The Shaykh frequentlyquotes other works of such ‘ulamá as Mu ammad TaqíḥMajlisí, particularly his Shar al-Ziyáraḥ ; Majma‘ al-Ba raynḥ of Fakhr al-Dín b. uray (d. 1085/1674); Ṭ ḥ Kámilal-Ziyára of Ja‘far b. Mu ammad Qolawayh (d. 368/978);ḥand al-I itijájḥ of A mad b. ‘Alí abrisí.ḥ Ṭ

126 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 19.127 By the term “madhhab” he may mean the Shí‘í doctrine.128 He is referring to the verse of the Qur’án which reads,

we will show them Our signs in all the regions of theearth and in their own souls, until they clearly seethat this is the truth.” (41:53).

129 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 69.130 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Risála-i U úlṣ , p. 135. Sayyid

Ká im wrote a treatise on the principles of Islamicẓjurisprudence. This treatise is combined with threeother Shaykhí manuscripts in one volume under the callnumber 2013-F in the Bahá’í National Archive in Iran.The 71-page treatise was written at the request of anunknown questioner.

131 “Mutawátir” is applied to a tradition with so manytransmitters that there could be no collusion, allbeing known to be reliable and not being under anycompulsion to lie.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, vol. 3, p. 25.

132 According to Hughes’ Dictionary of Islam, taqíya is,“A Shí‘ah doctrine. A pious fraud whereby the Shí‘ahMuslim believes he is justified in either smoothingdown or in denying the peculiarities of his religiouspersecution. Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, p. 628.

133 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Risála-i U úlṣ , p. 136.134 ibid., pp. 99–100.135 ibid., p. 132.136 ibid., p. 131.137 Zayn al-‘Ábidín Shírvání, Bustán al-Siyáha, p. 522.138 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Risála-i U úlṣ , p. 109.139 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 14.140 ibid., Risála-i U úlṣ , p. 152.141 ibid., p. 153.142 Considering the fact that Shaykh Aḥmad usually did not

make a second copy of his treatise for himself, and the

fact that his works were kept in the house of SayyidKá im Raẓ shtí in Karbalá, which was robbed twice, theShaykh could well have written more than 132 works(Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 125).

143 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, pp. 214–215.144 Riyá áhir, ḍ Ṭ Fihrist Ta áníf al-‘Alláma al-ṣ Shaykh A madḥ

al-A sá’íḥ .145 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 219.146 ibid., p. 242.147 ibid., p. 237.148 Abí al- adúq Mu ammad b. ‘Alí b. al- usayn b. BábawayhṢ ḥ Ḥ

al-Qomí, Man Lá Yah uruh al-Faqíhḍ , vol. 2, pp. 370–375.149 Abí Ja‘far Mu ammad b. al- asan al- osíḥ Ḥ Ṭ , Tahdhíb al-

A kámḥ , vol. 6, pp. 95–101.150 For the list of commentaries written on the Ziyárat al-

Jámi‘a see Áqá Bozorq al- ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a iláTa áníf al-ṣ Shí‘a, vol. 13, pp. 305–306.

151 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 128.152 ibid.153 Áqá Bozorg al- ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a, vol. 4, p. 430.154 Commentaries have been written on Tab irat al-ṣ

Muta‘allimín by not less than 30 Shí‘a ‘ulamá. (SeeÁqá Bozorg al- ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a, vol. 3, pp. 321–323;and vol. 13, pp. 133–138.

155 Sh aykh ‘Abd Alláh, Risála-i Shaykh ‘Abd Alláh, p. 18.156 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 228.157 In Áqá Bozorg al- ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a (vol. 13, p. 288),

the title of the work is recorded as Shar Risálat al-‘Ilmḥand the references to the manuscripts of the work aregiven.

158 A collection of Shaykh A mad’s important treatises wasḥpublished under the name of Jawámi‘ al-Kilam in twovolumes, the first in 1273/1856 and the second in1276/1859. The first volume consists of 40 treatisesand the second has 52.

159 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 228.160 ibid., p. 241.161 Riyá áhir, ḍ Ṭ Fihrist Ta ánífṣ , p. 6.162 ibid., p. 12.163 ibid., p. 13.

164NotesShaykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2, p. 167.165 Sh aykh A mad’s works on ontology are too numerous toḥ

list in full. The main ones are as follows:(1) Jawámi‘ al-Kilam. (Among the treatises compiled inthis collection we have relied heavily on “Shar ‘alaḥal-Risála al-‘Ilmíya”, part 2. pp. 166–200);(2) Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ ;(3) Shar al-Mashá‘ir;ḥ(4) Shar al-Fawá’idḥ .

Sayyid Ká im’s major works and those referred toẓhere most frequently are: contained in the U úl-iṣ‘Aqá’id, a collection of manuscripts with the callnumber 2016-F in the National Bahá’í Archive of Iran,consisting of three works: (1) U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ(pp. 1–215); (2) Risála-i Radd-i Shubha-i Ákill vaMa’kúl, written at the request of Prince Mu ammad Ri áḥ ḍMírzá (pp. 216–263); (3) an untitled treatise writtenfor Mírzá Mu ammad asan (pp. 263–281) to answer hisḥ Ḥquestions on: (a) the meaning of the Qába Qawsayn,(b) ‘Illíyat-i Wájib or ‘Illíyat-i Mashí’at, and(c) Khalq-i Mashí’at bi Nafsihá.

166 Sayyid Ká in Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , pp. 12–13.167 Necessary Being (al-Wájib al-Wujúd), is the Being which

exists by itself in contrast to the Possible Being(al-Mumkin al-Wujúd), which receives its Being fromanother, i.e., from the Necessary Being. While thenon existence of Necessary Being is unthinkable, the

non-existence of the Possible Being is thinkable.Philosophers use the term Necessary Being for God andPossible Being for the world.

168 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 9.169 ibid.170 ibid., p. 11.171 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 124.172 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Usúl-i ‘Aqá’id, p. 36.173 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 134.174 Sayyid Ká im quotes a Tradition on the authority ofẓ

Imám Ri á which reads, “Will and decree are from amongḍthe actional attributes. One who claims that God haspossessed will and decree from eternity (i.e.,pre-existence with God) does not believe in the onenessof God.” (U úl-i ‘Aqá‘idṣ , p. 36).

175 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá‘idṣ , p. 31.176 The verse of the Qur’án reads, “I have not created

Djinn and man, but that they should worship me.”(51:56); and a Tradition reads, “I was a hiddentreasure, I wished to be known, therefore, I createdall creation in order to be known.”

177 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Maḥ shá‘ir, p. 3.178 ibid., p. 308.179 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Fawá’idḥ , p. 457.180 ibid.181 ibid.182 ibid., p. 458.183 ibid., p. 459.184 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, The Treatise for Mírzá Mu ammadḥ

asanḤ , p. 279.185 Reference to this term is frequently made throughout

the works of Shaykh A mad. For example see ḥ Jawámi‘al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2, p. 183.

186 A. E. Affifi, The Mystical Philosophy of MuḥyidDín-Ibnul ‘Arabí, pp. 171–172.

187 ibid., p. 13.188 The Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “Ibn al-‘Arabí”,

by A. Ate .ṣ189 Sh aykh A mad Aḥ ḥsá’í, Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 40.190 ibid., p. 123.191 ibid., p. 125.192 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi’ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,

p. 175.193 Annemarie Schimmel, Mystical Dimension of Islam, p. 267.194 ibid., p. 268.195 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,

p. 176.196 ibid., p. 177.197 ibid.198 ibid.199 ibid.200 ibid.201 ‘Abd al-Mu sin Miḥ shkát al-Díní, Na arí bi Falsafa-iẓ

adr al-Dín Ṣ Shírází “Mullá adr”, pp. 174–175.Ṣ202 Jawád Mu lih, ṣ Mabda’-i Áfarínesh az Dídgáh-i Falásifa-i

Islám, p. 181.203 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Fawá’idḥ , p. 157.204 ibid., p. 455.205 ibid., p. 456.206 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 11.207 ibid.208 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 119.209 ibid., p. 125.210 ibid., p. 117.211 ibid., p. 129.212 ibid., pp. 131–132.213 There are verses in the Qur’án and Traditions that

refer to sins and shortcomings of the prophets.Sayyid Ká im suggest that these verses are among thoseẓ

unclear (mutashábihát) verses that should be understoodin the light of the clear (mu kamátḥ ) verses. Here, forexample, are three verses that indicate the sins andshortcomings of the prophets: “And Adam disobeyed hisLord, so his life became evil (to him)” (20:121);“God forgiveth thy earlier and later faults, andfulfilleth His goodness to thee, and guideth thee onthe right way” (48:2); “And of old We made a covenantwith Adam; but he forgot it; and we found no firmnessof purpose in him” (20:115).

In contrast to these verses, there are otherswhich clearly indicate the sublime morality of theprophets such as, “And most surely you conform(yourself) to sublime morality” (68:4); or, “Nor doeshe speak out of desire. It is naught but revelationthat is revealed, the Lord of Mighty Power has taughthim” (53:3–5). These verses clearly establish theinfallibility of the prophet, for while the firstdenies that he does anything which is immoral, thesecond denies that he says anything which is notrevealed to him. Sayyid Ká im says that if we do notẓwant to understand the unclear sin-indicating versesin the light of the clear verses, these sin-indicatingverses do not prove that the prophet committed thatwhich is forbidden ( arámḥ ) or ignored that which isobligatory (wájib). He further remarks that the sins,if any, that are related to them could have been thesins of the community which they bore as a matter offavor to their communities.

214 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 156.215 ibid., p. 157.216 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziyárat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 11.217 ibid., p. 112. See also pp. 116 and 120.218 ibid., p. 136.219 ibid., p. 37.220 ibid., p. 49.221 ibid., p. 44.222 ibid., p. 80.223 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 176.224 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziy’rat al-Jámi‘aḥ , p. 24.225 ibid., p. 80.226 ibid., p. 65.227 ibid., p. 49.228 “A title given to a leading sect of the Shí‘ahs who,

through their excessive zeal for the Imáms, have raisedthem above the degree of human being.” Thomas PatrickHughes, Dictionary of Islam, p. 139.

229NotesThis term refers to allegorical verses in the Qur’án.

See Qur’án 3:7 and 39:23.230 The Qur’án reads, “He it is who has revealed the Book

to you: some of its verses are decisive, they are thebasis of the Book, and others are allegorical; then asfor those in whose hearts there is perversity, theyfollow the part of it which is allegorical, seeking tomislead, and seeking to give it (their own) inter-pretation; but none knows its interpretation exceptAllah, and those who are firmly rooted in knowledge.”(3:6)

231 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, The Treatise for Mírzá Mu ammadḥasanḤ (see chapter 3, n. 2), pp. 266–263.

232 See the following verses of the Qur’án on the Day ofJudgment: 101:1–11; 82:1–19; 69:13–37; 56:1–56.

233 The term means false or lying. It is given in IslamicTraditions to religious impostors.

234 Gog and Magog, in Arabic, Yájúj wa Májúj or Y’ajúj waM’ajúj, are mentioned in the Qur’án. See 18:93–97.

235 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’ídṣ (see chapter 3,

n. 2), p. 188.236 Mu ammad Mu‘ín, “Havarqalyá”, ḥ Majalla-i Dáneshkada-i

Adabíyát, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 34.237 Mu ammad Tonekáboní, ḥ Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ , p. 44.238 The most famous philosopher in nineteenth century Iran.

Particularly well known for his commentaries on Mulláadrá’s works.Ṣ

239 A great philosopher of his time and the teacher of ájjḤMullá Hádí Sabzavárí.

240 Tonekáboní, Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ , pp. 45–46.241 Mu‘ín, Majalla-i Dáneshkada-i Adabíyát, p. 84.242 ibid., p. 85.243 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-kilam (see chapter 3,

n. 2), vol. 1, part 2, p. 124.244 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-‘Arshíyaḥ , p. 119.245 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 1,

p. 123. Shaykh A mad’s doctrine on this subject is notḥoriginal. However, an examination of the origins ofhis doctrine, and of the sources which may haveinfluenced his ideas, and of the similarities betweenhis doctrine and other religious and philosophicalsystems, is beyond the scope of this work.

246 ibid.247 ibid., p. 122.248 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, untitled collection of treatises,

p. 61, published in 1276/1859 in Tabríz. This workcontains mostly treatises written by Sayyid Ká imẓRashtí at the request of individual questioners. Alithography of this collection, bound along with ShaykhA mad’s ḥ Shar al-Fawá’ídḥ bears the call number 2019-Fin the National Bahá’í Archive of Iran. This collec-tion will hereafter be referred to as Collection ofTreatises.

249 Nafs-i ná iqaṭ , “the reasoning soul”, is unique to humanbeings. While it possesses the faculties of vegetableand animal souls it also has the faculty of reasoning,which distinguishes man from plants and animals.Nafs-i ná iqaṭ is the manifestation of man’s spirit.

250 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Collection of Treatises, p. 361.251 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, Davázdah Risála az ḥ ḥ Shaykh A madḥ

A sá’í, p. 33. This collection of twelve shortḥtreatises by Shaykh A mad A sá’í was copied by Ya‘qúbḥ ḥb. Muqím b. Sharíf al-Bárforoshi in 1263/1846; themanuscript is in the National Bahá’í Archive of Iranand has the call number 2022-F. This collection willhereafter be referred to as the Davázdah Risála.

252 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Fawá’idḥ (see chapter 3,n. 2), pp. 160–161.

253 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Davázdah Risála, p. 37.254 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,

p. 119.255 See the Qur’án, 17:1; 53:7–14.256 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, The Treatise for Mírzá Mu ammadḥ

asanḤ , p. 272.257 ibid., p. 268.258 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , pp. 197–198.259 ibid., p. 200.260 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Davázdah Risála, p. 107.261 See the Traditions in Mu ammad Báqir Majlisí, ḥ Bi árḥ

al-Anwár, vol. 13, part 51, pp. 44–64.262 ibid., p. 49.263 ibid., p. 53.264 ibid., p. 45.265 Sh aykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ , Jawímí‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,

p. 139.266 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Collection of Treatises, p. 271.267 ibid., p. 272.

268Notes

ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermání, Hidáyat al- álibínṬ ,p. 71.

269 Abú al-Qásim Ibráhímí, Fihrist-i Kutub-i Masháyikh-i‘I ámẓ , p. 116.

270 Mu ammad Báqir al-Músawí al-I bahání, ḥ ṣ Raw át al-Jannátḍfí A wál al-‘Ulamá wa al-Sádátḥ , vol. 1, p. 225.

271 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 115.272 ibid.273 Mu ammad ‘Alí Mu‘allim abíbábádí, ḥ Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár,

vol. 1, p. 217.274 Mu ammad Tonekáboní, ḥ Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ , pp. 43–44.275 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, in his Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ ,

gives a full report on the nature of the dispute. Seepage 46ff.

276 Tonekáboní, Qi a al-‘Ulamáṣ ṣ , p. 100. Astarábádí’sbook, entitled ayát al-ArwáḤ ḥ, was written in 1240/1824.Mírzá asan b. ‘Alí Gauhar QaráḤ cha Dághí, an outstand-ing student of the Shaykhí school, wrote Shar -iḥKitáb-i ayát al-ArwáhḤ in 1252/1836 to reject Astará-bádí’s views.

277 ibid., p. 44.278 ibid., p. 55.279 For example, the treatise written for Shaykh Mu ammadḥ

b. Shaykh usayn Ba rání contains 80 questions. SeeḤ ḥIbráhímí, Fihrist, p. 342.

280 Sayyid Ká im, ẓ Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 144.281 ibid., pp. 146–168.282 A. L. M. Nicolas, Essai Sur Le Chéikhisme, pp. 32–36.283 Mu‘allim abibábádí, Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, pp. 213–217.284 Mu ammmad ‘Alí Mudarrisḥ , Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , 3d ed.,

vol. 2, pp. 308–309.285 Ibráhíní, Fihrist, pp. 288–359.286 ibid., p. 286.287 Músawí is quoted in Mudarris, Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 2,

p. 309.288 According to Áqá Bozorg al- ehrání (Ṭ al-Dharí‘a ilá

Ta áníf al-ṣ Shí‘a, vol. 20, p. 531, the complete title ofthe work is al-Majmú‘ al-Rá‘iq min Azhár al- adá’iqḤ .It contains prayers and Traditions on the authorityof the Prophet and the imáms and several treatisesby different authors on subjects such as religiousbeliefs, theology, and fiqh. The work was compiledby Sayyid Hibat Alláh b. Abí Mu ammad al- asanḥ Ḥal-Músawí in 703/1303.

289 Mashá’riq Anwár al-Yaqín fí aqá’iq (kaḤ shf) Asrár Amíral-Mu’minín, a major work of al-Bursí, written in773/1371. See al-Dharí‘a, vol. 21, p. 34.

290 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 146.291 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Shar al-ḥ Khu ba al- utunjíyaṭ Ṭ ,

p. 7.292 ‘Abd al-Báqí b. Sulaymán b. A mad Afandí al-Mú ilí wasḥ ṣ

born in 1204/1789 in Mú il but spent most of his lifeṣin Baghdád. He was a distinguished poet and theauthor of several books on poetry and biography. Hedied in 1278/1361 in Baghdád. See Mu‘allim abíbábádí,ḤMakárim al-Áthár, pp. 172–173.

293 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Dalíl al-Muta ayyirínḥ , p. 147.294 A lithograph of this work was published in Tabríz in

1272/1855.295 Mu‘allim abíbábádí, Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, pp. 217–220.296 Ibráhimí, Fihrist, p. 122. Qurrat al-‘Ain, the great

Persian poetess and the famous student of Sayyid Ká im,ẓin one of her treatises has called him “al-Qatíl”(the killed one). See Mírzá Asad Alláh Fá il Mázandar-ḍání, uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ , vol. 3, p. 502.

297 Mu‘allim abíbábádí, in Ḥ Makárim al-Áthár, p. 220,gives the phrase الهدی بدر and Mudarris in Ray ,غاب ánatḥal-Adab, vol. 2, p. 309, gives the phrase نور .غابThe numerical values of both phrases are equal to 1259,

the year Sayyid Ká im died.ẓ298 Mu ammad Ma‘ úm ḥ ṣ Shírází, known as Ma‘ úm ‘Alí ṣ Sháh and

Náyib al- adr, Ṣ ará’iq al- aqá’iqṬ Ḥ , vol. 3, p. 338.299 Sayyid Ká im’s will was dictated to Mírzá Mu íẓ ḥ ṭ

(Kermání), his close student and companion. A copy ofthe will, in manuscript form, is included (ms. no. 4)in the Shaykhí Manuscript Collection in the NearEastern Collection, Special Collection Department, inthe Research Library at the University of California,Los Angeles. The copy, which runs to 15 pages of 14lines per page, is undated and does not bear the nameof the scribe. It will hereafter be referred to asWill.

300 ibid., p. 6.301 The Day of Gathering (yaum al-jam‘) is referred to in

the Qur’án in the following verse: “And that you maygive warning on the day of gathering together whereinis no doubt ….” (42:7).

302 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Will, p. 4.303 ibid., p. 5.304 ibid., p. 6.305 ibid.306 ibid. These phrases are derived from the following

Quranic references: 2:256; 3:102; 31:22.307 ibid., p. 9.308 Qurrat al-‘Ain states that the Báb (al-Dhikr al-Akbar)

stayed at ‘Atabát for eleven months—eight months inKarbalá and three months in other cities. While he wasin Karbala he would attend the circle once every two orthree days but he would not attend the entire session;he would either come in at the beginning or in themiddle or at the end of the session. (Mírzá Asad AlláhFá il Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ , p. 529.

309 The question is not the precise definitions andexclusive limits of each term (qua concept) but thefluid overlap and deliberate use of the “gray area”terminology.

310 The Báb states that those who, through the preparationof Sayyid Ká im, believed in him were all the mostẓpious scholars to whose piety and knowledge ShaykhA mad and Sayyid Ká im had testified. Mírzá Asad Alláhḥ ẓFá l Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ , p. 286).

311 For the biography of ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khán Kermánísee the Fihrist, pp. 57–73 and Ni‘mat Alláh al-Ra awíḍal-Sharíf, Tadhkirat al-Awaliyá, pp. 2–95.

312 Mu ammad Himmat, ḥ Táríkh-i Mufa al-i Kermánṣṣ ,pp. 252–256.

313 Ni‘mat Alláh al-Ra awí al-ḍ Sharíf, Tadhkirat al-Awliyá,p. 15.

314 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 64. ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khánwrote a short autobiography in Arabic. This work wastranslated into Persian by Abú al-Qásim Ibráhímí andis included in his biography in the Fihrist, pp. 61–73.

315 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, p. 64. ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khánattended Sayyid Ká im’s circle for a total of aboutẓthree years.

316 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, pp. 66–67.317 Mu ammad Himmat, ḥ Táríkh-i Mufa al-i Kermánṣṣ , p. 256.318 For the biography of the Shaykhí leaders of Kermán see

the first volume of the Fihrist.319 Mehdí Bámdád, Taríkh-i Rijál-i Irán, vol. 6, p. 209.320 ibid., p. 210. Bámdád explains that in Shí‘a the term

ná iqíṭ indicates that there must always be a ná iqṭ ,i.e., a leader or imám in the community and that theother members must be silent.

321 ibid., p. 211.322 Al-Dharí‘a (vol. 4, p. 171), and the Ray ánat al-Adabḥ

(vol. 3, p. 273) state that the author of the Tiryáq-iFárúq is Mu ammad usayn b. Mu ammad ‘Alí al- usayníḥ Ḥ ḥ Ḥ

al-Shahrestání. On the second page of the book, theauthor gives his name as ‘Abd al- amad b. ‘Abd AlláhṢal- usayní al-Mázandarání. The Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq waswritten in 1301/1883 and published in lithography inMashhad in 1309/1890.

323 Áqá Bozorg al- ehráníṬ , al-Dharí‘a, vol. 8, p. 113.324 Bámdád, Táríkh-i Rijál, vol. 6, p. 211. According to

Kayván, however, the uprising during which MírzáMu ammad Báqir was killed took place in 1314/1896 notḥin 1315/1997. See ‘Abbás ‘Alí Kayván, ájj NámaḤ , p. 128.

325 ibid., p. 132.326 Nu rat Alláh Fat í, ṣ ḥ Zendegí Náma-i Shahíd-i Níknám

Thiqat al-Islám Tabrízí, p. 17.327 See ibid., chapters 41 and 42.328 ibid., p. 22.329 ibid., p. 24.330 ibid., pp. 45–78. Fat í also published a collectionḥ

of Thiqat al-Islám’s treatises, letters, cables, andarticles, entitled Majmú‘a-i Áthár-i Qalamí-iShádraván Thiqat al-Islám-i Shahíd-i Tabrízí.

331 A mad Kasraví, ḥ Táríkh-i Mashrú a-i Iránṭ , p. 133.332 Fat íḥ , Zendegí Náma-i Shahíd, pp. 40–41.333 ibid., p. 41.334 ibid.335 Bámdád, Táríkh-i Rijál, vol. 6, p. 41.336 Shoghi Effendi, The Dawn-Breakers:

Nabíl’s Narrative of the Early Days of the Bahá’íRevelation, p. 72.

337 This is according to Qurrat al-‘Ain. See n. 41 above.338 Shoghi Effendi, Dawn-Breakers, p. 44.339 Several extracts of these addresses are published in

the following work: Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad the Báb,ḥSelections from the Writings of the Báb, pp. 11–37.

340 George N. Curzon. Persia and the Persian Question,vol. 1, p. 501.

341 Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “Báb”, byC. Huart. For the history of this title and itsemployment see also, “Note D. The meaning of the Title‘Báb’” in A Traveller’s Narrative, pp. 226–234.

342 In Shí‘í history the period between the years 60/872–329/939 is the period of the Lesser Occultation.During these sixty-nine years the Imám communicatedwith his people through four gates: Abú ‘Umar ‘Uthmánb. Sa‘íd; Abú Ja‘far Mu ammad b. ‘Uḥ thmán, son of theabove; usayn b. Rú ; and Abú al- asan ‘Alí b. Mu ammadḤ ḥ Ḥ ḥSímarí.

343 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Shar al-Ziyáraḥ , p. 11.344 ibid.345 ibid., p. 13.346 ibid., p. 15.347 Mírzá Asad Alláh Fá il Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ ,

p. 512.348 ibid., p. 502.349 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 51.350 Browne, Traveller’s Narrative, p. 227.351 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 44.352 ibid., p. 50.353 ibid., p. 46.354 ibid., p. 80.355 The Báb in his Persian Bayán writes,

As thou hast heard, at the manifestation ofthe Nu a-i-Fur ánḳṭ ḳ [i.e., Mu ammad, who wasḥin his time the “Point of Revelation”] allthose who were believers in the Gospel wereexpecting the promised Aḥmad, and thou hastheard what befell that Sun of Truth duringthe twenty-three years of his mission, so thathe said, “No prophet hath been afflicted as

I have been afflicted.” Yet all were entreat-ing and craving his appearance, and in thewords of Jesus, working for him. Praise beto God that in that day thou wast not! Butthou vast in the manifestation of the Nu a-i-ḳṭBeyán [i.e., the Báb, the “Point of Revelation”]when all believers in the Apostle of God wereexpecting the appearance of the promised Mahdí;for this tradition is from the Apostle of God,and all, simple and gentle, are agreed therein.Now there is no doubt that the substance ofFaith was confined to the Shi‘ites, and thatthe sect of Islám is this same outward sectwhereof the adherents call themselves Shi‘ites;while men avowedly call Fárs the “Abode ofKnowledge”: Yet, although the Tree of Trutharose, not one of the people recognized it[even] after perceiving it. The degree oftheir remoteness is evident, for this sufficethunto their abasement; yet night and day theyexclaim “speed! speed!”And also,Consider with due attention, for the matteris very strait, even while it is more spaciousthan the heavens and the earth and what isbetween them. For instance, if all those whowere expecting [the fulfillment] of the sayingof Jesus had been assured of the manifestationof Aḥmad [i.e. Muḥammad], not one would haveturned aside from the saying of Jesus. Solikewise in the manifestation of the Nu a-i-ḳṭBeyán [i.e., the Báb] if all should be assuredthat this is that same Mahdí [whose comingwas] promised, whom the Apostle of God fore-told, not one of the believers in the Ḳur’ánwould have turned aside from the saying ofthe Apostle of God. So likewise in the mani-festation of Him whom God shall manifest beholdthe same thing, for should all be assured thathe is that same “He whom God shall manifest”whom the Nu a-i-Beyánḳṭ foretold, not one wouldturn aside.(Browne, Traveller’s Narrative, pp. 293–295. The twopassages above are Browne’s translation.)

356 Dalá’il al-Sab‘, one of the Báb’s major works, waswritten for Mullá ‘Abd al-Kháliq Yazdí while the Bábwas in prison at Máko. In it the author gives sevenreasons for his claim’s validity.

357 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 119.358 Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad Báb, ḥ Persian Bayán, pp.

324–326.359 ibid., pp. 200–210; pp. 218–219; pp. 306–309; pp. 274–

278.360 ibid., p. 181.361 ibid., pp. 29–30.362 The Báb writes, “Say, O people of the world! Do ye

dispute with Me about God by virtue of the names whichye and your fathers have adopted for Him at thepromptings of the Evil One? God hath indeed sent downthis Book unto Me with truth that ye may be enabled torecognize the true names of God, inasmuch as ye havestrayed in error far from the Truth. Verily We havetaken a covenant from every created thing upon itscoming into being concerning the Remembrance of God,and there shall be none to avert the binding command ofGod for the purification of mankind, as ordained in theBook which is written by the hand of the Báb.”(Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 65).

363 The main polemical works of ájj Mu ammad Karím Ḥ ḥ Khánare as follows: (1) Izháq al-Bá il dar Radd-i Báb-iṭMurtáb, written in 1261/1845 and published in Kermán in1351/1932; (2) Tír-i Shiháb dar Radd-i Báb-i KhusránMa’áb, written at the request of Mu ammad ḥ SharífKermání in 1262/1846. This work is a part of Majma‘al-Rasá’il, no. 1, published in Kermán in 1386/1966:(3) Shiháb-i Tháqib, written in 1265/1848 and publishedin Kermán in 1353/1934; (4) Risála-i Radd-i Báb-iMurtáb, written at the request of Ná ir al-Dín ṣ Sháh,in 1283/1866. This work was published in 1384/1964 inKermán and its translation into Arabic also appeared inthe same year. About his attempts to refute the Báb,

ájj Karím Ḥ Khán writes, “For a long time from thepulpit (minbar) and in my classes, I showed everyonethat this man (the Báb) was wrong. I wrote many booksand sent them to all parts of Iran, Ádharbáyján.Khorásán, Arabia, India, and so on, and with the helpof God, I prevented a great number of people fromfalling victim to this plight.” (Radd-i Báb-i Murtáb,p. 24. This edition of Radd-i Báb-i Murtáb along withRisála-i Tazyyil dar Radd-i Háshim-i Shámí waspublished in one volume.)

364 Hájj Karím Khán Kermání, Risála-i Radd-i Báb-i Murtáb,pp. 27–28, 58.

365 ibid., p. 27. The Adhán is the “call to prayer” bywhich a crier (mu’adhdhin) summons the believers to thepublic prayer.

366 ibid., pp. 28–58.367 ibid., pp. 45–47.368 Fá il Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ , pp. 399–400.369 For a full account of the interrogation of the Báb see,

“Examination of the Báb at Tabríz” in Shoghi Effendi,Dawn-Breakers, pp. 309–323; and “The First Examinationof the Báb at Tabríz” in Browne, Traveller’s Narrative,pp. 277–290.

370 Bámdád, Táríkh-i Rijál, vol. 4, pp. 59–60.371 ibid., vol. 3, pp. 289–290.372 Áqá Bozorg al- ehrání, al-Ṭ Dharí‘a, vol. 15, p. 15.373 Riyá áhir, ḍ Ṭ Fihrist Ta áníf al-‘Alláma al-ṣ Shaykh A madḥ

al-A sá’íḥ , p. 5.374 Bámdád, Táríkh-i Rijál, vol. 2, p. 452.

375NotesFor the names of some of the Shaykhí scholars who

became Bábís see Mehdí Bámdád, Táríkh-i Rijál-i Irán,vol. 2, pp. 471–472.

376 Nabíl Zarandí, one of the earliest historians of theBábí movement, devoted the first two chapters of hishistory to the biographies of Shaykh A mad A sá’í andḥ ḥSayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, showing how through their teach-ings Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im prepared theirḥ ẓstudents for the acceptance of the Báb. Nabíl openshis first chapter thus: “At a time when the shiningreality of the Faith of Mu ammad had been obscured byḥthe ignorance, the fanaticism, and perversity of thecontending sects into which it had fallen, thereappeared above the horizon of the East that luminousStar of Divine guidance, Shaykh A mad-i-A sá’í. …ḥ ḥAglow with zeal and conscious of the sublimity of hiscalling, he vehemently appealed not only to shí‘ahIslám but to all the followers of Mu ammad throughoutḥthe East, to awaken from the slumber of negligence andto prepare the way for Him who must needs be mademanifest in the fulness of time, whose light alonecould dissipate the mists of prejudice and ignorancewhich had enveloped that Faith.” Shoghi Effendi,The Dawn-Breakers: Nabíl’s Narrative of the EarlyDays of the Bahá’í Revelation, pp. 1–2. For the Báb

and the Bábís, Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im resembledḥ ẓJohn the Baptist, who prophesied the coming of Jesus.

377 Bausani writes, ‘Before his [Sayyid Ká im’s] deathẓ(1259/1843) he had sent disciples to all parts ofPersia in search of the awaited Mahdí, the á ibṢ ḥal-Zamán, who, according to his prophecies, would notbe long before manifesting himself.” (Encyclopaedia ofIslam, s.v. “Báb”).

378 The writings of Shaykh A mad and Sayyid Ká im on theḥ ẓQá’im are too numerous to list in full. For a list ofthe main passages, sections, and chapters dealing withthis subject and related issues see Appendix A.

379 The abjad system is a title for an arithmeticalarrangement in which each letter of the alphabet has anumerical value from one to one thousand. For a listof the letters with their equivalent numerical valuessee Appendix B.

380 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,p. 103. Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí elaborates the idea in hisShar al-ḥ Khu ba al- utunjíyaṭ Ṭ , p. 180.

381 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 157.382 ibid., p. 157.383 ibid.384 Sh aykh A mad A sá’íḥ ḥ , Jawámi‘ al-Kilam, vol. 1, part 2,

p. 153.385 . Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 158.386 This is based on the Traditions on the authority of the

Shí’í Imáms. Mu ammad Báqir Majlisí quotes several ofḥthem in his Bi ar al-Anwárḥ , vol. 13, part 51, pp. 44–64.

387 See chapter 5, n. 32.388 The Qur’án reads, “And that you may give warning of the

day of gathering together wherein is no doubt ….”(42:7)

389 For the conception of the Mahdí see “The ExpectedDeliverer” in John Alden Williams, ed., Themes ofIslamic Civilization, pp. 191–251. The excerpts ofthe primary sources in translation are given in thosepages.

390 According to Shí‘í sources, the Twelfth Imám, Mu ammadḥb. asan b. ‘Alí al-‘Askarí, went into occultation inḤ260/872. For sixty-nine years, until 329/939, a periodreferred to as the Lesser Occultation, he communicatedwith his believers through the Four Gates. In 329/939,with the death of the Fourth Gate, the period known asthe Greater Occultation began. During this period,which will last as long as God wills, the Imám has notemporal comunication with his followers. One day,however, God will grant him permission to manifesthimself again.

391 Majlisí, Bi ár al-Anwárḥ , vol. 13, part 51, p. 30.392 ibid., p. 36.393 ibid., p. 43.394 ibid., p. 30.395 Williams, Themes of Islamic Civilization, p. 207.396 Majlisí, Bi ár al-Anwarḥ , vol. 13, part 51, pp. 44–64.397 Shoghi Effendi, Dawn-Breakers, pp. 27–28.398 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ ayát al-NafsḤ , trans. Sayyid Ká imẓ

Rashtí, p. 90.399 Mu ammad b. ‘Abd Alláh b. asan b. ‘Alí b. Abí álib,ḥ Ḥ Ṭ

known as Nafs al-Zakíya, originally from Medina, wasone of the companions of Imám ádiq. He claimed to beṢan Imám and was killed in 145/762.

400 The Rukn is the corner on the cubic-shaped Ka‘ba inwhich the Black Stone is located. The Maqám is aseparate structure, Maqám Ibráhím, to the north of theKa‘ba.

401 The Sacred Mosque (Masjid al- arámḤ ) is in Mecca andcontains the Ka‘ba.

402 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ ayát al-NafsḤ , p. 91.

403 The Sufyání, according to the Shí‘í sources, is an uglyman from the descendants of Yazíd b. Mu‘áwíya who willarise to fight with the Mahdí. See Encyclopaedia ofIslam, first ed., by D. B. Macdonald, s.v. “al-Mahdí”.

404 Sh aykh A mad A sá’í, ḥ ḥ ayát al-NafsḤ , p. 92.405 ibid.406 ‘Abd al- amíd IḤ shráq Khávarí, Ra íq-i Maḥ khtúm, vol. 1,

pp. 679–680.407 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Shar al-Qa ídaḥ ṣ , p. 298.408 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Collection of Treatises, p. 272

(see chapter 4, n. 20).409 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Shar al-Qa ídaḥ ṣ , p. 2.410 Mírzá Asad Alláh Fa il Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ ,

vol. 3, p. 402.411 ibid., p. 509.412 Shoghi Effendi, Dawn-Breakers, p. 14.413 ibid., pp. 25, 38.414 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, U úl-i ‘Aqá’idṣ , p. 207.415 Sh imr b. Dhi al-Jawshan was the head of Yazíd’s army.

which fought with usayn b. ‘Alí. Ḥ Shimr carried thehead of usayn to Yazíd in Damascus. He was killedḤfighting the army of Mukhtár b. Abú ‘Ubaydah Thaqafí.Yazíd b. Mu‘áwíya b. Abí Sufyán was the second Caliphof the Umayyad Dynasty, who sent his army to fight with

usayn b. ‘Alí. He died in 64/683 at the age of 38.Ḥ416 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Usúl-i ‘Aqá’id, p. 208.417 Ibráhímí, Fihrist, pp. 120–122.418 ibid., p. 122.419 Majlisí, Bi ár al-Anwárḥ , vol. 13, part 51, p. 62.420 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 19.421 Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, Shar al-Qa ídaḥ ṣ , p. 2.422 Mírzá Asad Alláh Fá il Mázandarání, ḍ uhúr al- aqqẒ Ḥ ,

pp. 309–310.423 The Báb’s prophesies of Bahá’u’lláh are very often made

under the title “Him Whom God Shall Manifest”. See“Note V. Texts from the Persian Beyan Illustrating theBáb’s view of His Relation to ‘Him Whom God ShallManifest’” in Browne, Traveller’s Narrative, pp. 347–349.

424 The Báb writes, “Today the Bayán is in the stage ofseed: at the beginning of the manifestation of Him WhomGod Shall make manifest its ultimate perfection willbecome apparent.” “Ere nine will have elapsed from theinception of this Cause the realities of the createdthings will not be made manifest. All that thou hestas yet seen is but the stage from the moist-germ untilWe clothed it with flesh. Be patient until thoubeholdest a new creation. Say: Blessed, therefore, beGod, the Most Excellent of makers!” Shoghi Effendi,God Passes By, p. 98).

425NotesMudarris, in his Ray ánat al-Adabḥ , vol. 1, p. 81), states

that when Shaykh A mad’s works and approach (ḥ maslak)became widely known, he became subject to the cursesand censure of the people. They changed their attitudetoward him and even his son, Shaykh Mu ammad,ḥopenly rose against him. Then, Mudarris gives thenames of the most distinguished ‘ulamá who opposedShaykh A mad, namely, Mu ammad asan (theḥ ḥ Ḥauthor of Jawáhir al-Kalám, Áqá Sayyid Ibráhím(Qazvíní) (the author of awábiḌ ṭ), Sharíf al-‘Ulamá,and Mu ammad usayn (the author of ḥ Ḥ Fu úlṣ ).Mudarris continues that the majority of thetheologians (fuqahá’) of the period did not decline tocurse him; even the divine philosopher, ájj Mullá ‘AlíḤNúri, in spite of his respect for the Shaykh, deniedhis scholarship (fa lḍ ), and Khánsárí, also, cursed him,in his Raw át al-Jannátḍ , in which he wrote the bio-

graphy of Shaykh Rajab Bursí.

usayní, in his Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq, p. 26), says that becauseShaykh A mad regarded the imáms as the Four Causesḥ(see below) a group of ‘ulamá rejected him. Then, usayníḤgives several names as examples, namely, Sayyid Mahdí b.

abá abá’í, Mullá (Mu ammad) Taqí (known asṬ ṭ ḥShahíd-i Thálith), Mullá (Mu ammad) Ja‘far Astarábádí,ḥand Mullá Áqá Darbandí. As demonstrated previously,the opposition to Shaykh A mad dates back to 1239 orḥ40/1824 when ájj Mu ammad Taqí BaraḤ ḥ ghání (Shahíd-iThálith) issued a takfír against him. Then, at thetime of Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí, the takfír of Sayyid Mahdí

abá abá’í was issued. This was followed by a seriesṬ ṭof attacks from several religious leaders whose namesappear above.

426 The polemical works against the Shaykhís are toonumerous to be fully listed here. Al- ehrání, in hisṬal-Dharí‘a ilá Ta áníf al-ṣ Shí‘a, vol. 10, pp. 182, 203)describes several of them. Below, a typical polemicalwork, the Tiryáq-i Fárúq, will be closely examined.

427 Mullá Mu ammad Ja‘far Astarábádí was one of the parti-ḥcipants in the interrogation of Sayyid Ká im Raẓ shtí(see chapter 5). He wrote the ayát al-ArwáhḤ , apolemical work against the Shaykhís, in 1240/1824,apparently the earliest one (See chapter 5, n. 9).

428 Sh aykh Mu ammad asan Najafí was the author of ḥ Ḥ Jawáhiral-Kalám, the most comprehensive work of jurisprudencein the period.

429 The name is also recorded as Mu ammad usayn b.ḥ ḤMu ammad ‘Alí al- usayní al-ḥ Ḥ Shahrestání (see chapter 5,n. 553.

430 ‘Alí Davvání, Ostád-i Kull, Áqá Mu ammad Báqir b.ḥMu ammad Akmal Ma‘rif bi Wa íd Behbáháníḥ ḥ , p. 463.

431 Irshád al-‘Awám is a major work of ájj Mu ammad KarímḤ ḥKhán Kermání on theology written in Persian in about1263–65/1346–48.

432 Áqá Bozorg al- ehrání, Ṭ al-Dharí‘a, vol. 4, p. 441.433 usayní has a lengthy discussion on this point whichḤ

runs to 52 pages (pp. 6–58). He gives the Shaykhídoctrines on the subject and then quotes severalstatements from Mufíd, ‘Allama illí, Majlisí andḤSayyid Murta á to show that ḍ Shaykhí doctrines contra-dict these thinkers.

434 usayní, Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq, p. 59.435 ibid., p. 179.436 ibid., p. 193.437 usayní quotes Mufíd who quotes adúq that, “In ourḤ Ṣ

belief the Qhulát and the Mufawwi a are infidels andḍare worse than the Jews, Christians, Majús, Qadaríya,

arúríya, and arbíya, or any other group of innova-Ḥ Ḥtors with misleading illusions.” Then Mufid elaborates

adúq’s statement above in the following words, “TheṢGhulát are those who have related ‘Alí and his descen-dents, the imáms, to God and prophethood, and havedescribed their religious and secular virtues to anextreme. They are infidels whom the Amír al-Mu’ninín(‘Alí) ordered to be killed and burned; the imáms alsoregarded them as infidels who have left Islam. TheMufawwi a were a branch of the ḍ Ghulát, but theybelieved that the imáms are non-eternal and created, anddenied that they are eternal. In spite of this, theMufawwi a regard the ḍ imáms as the creators and thedistributors of sustenance (rizq). The Mufawwi aḍbelieve that God only created the imáms and Hedelegated (tafwíḍ) them to create the whole world andevery thing and every action in it.” (Tiryáq-i Fárúq,pp. 44–45).

438 usayní, Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq, p. 151.

439 ibid., p. 154.440 ibid., p. 158.441 ibid., pp. 164–165.442 ibid., p. 119.443 ibid., p. 169.444 ibid., p. 170.445 ibid., p. 196.446 ibid., p. 174.447 ibid., p. 182.448 ibid., pp. 200–201.449 The Qur’án reads, “And a tree that grows out of Mount

Sinai which produces oil and a condiment for those whoeat.” (23:20) And also it reads, “Consider the fig andthe olive, and Mount Sinai.” (95:1–2)

450 The Qur’án reads, “And when Moses came at Our appointedtime and his Lord spoke to him, he said: My Lordsshow me (Thyself), so that I may look upon Thee. Hesaid: You cannot (bear to) see Me, but look at themountain, if it remains firm in its place, then willyou see Me; but when his Lord manifested His glory tothe mountain He made it crumble and Moses fell down inswoon: then when he recovered, he said: Glory be toThee, I turn to Thee, and I an the first of thebelievers.” (7:143)

451 The Qur’án reads, “They said: O Zulqarnain! surely Gogand Magog make mischief in the land. Shall we then payyou a tribute or condition that you should raise abarrier between us and them.” (18:94)

452 “Guarding oneself”. A Shí‘ah doctrine. A pious fraudwhereby the Shí‘ah Muslim believes he is justified ineither smoothing down or in denying the peculiaritiesof his religious belief, in order to save himself fromreligious persecution. A Shí‘ah can, therefore, passhimself off as a Sunní to escape persecution ….”(Thomas Patrick Hughes, Dictionary of Islam, p. 628.

453 Mention of Gog and Magog is made in two places in theQur’án: 21:96 and 18:94. The latter reference has todo with the discussion (Quoted in n. 27 above).

454 usayní, Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq, p. 202.455 ibid., p. 203.456 usayní regarded the “Ál Mu ammad” Ḥ ḥ as the descendents of

‘Abd Alláh rather than of the Prophet Mu ammad.ḥ457 usayní, Ḥ Tiryáq-i Fárúq, p. 214.458 According to Mehdí Bámdád, some people believe that the

family of Mírzá A mad were from Muḥ ghán and not fromKhoy (Shar -i ál-i Rijál-i Iránḥ Ḥ , vol. 1, p. 100).

459 ibid., p. 100.460 ‘Abbás ‘Alí Kayván, ájj NámaḤ , p. 128 (see chapter 5,

n. 57).461 The Báb writes, “Since thou hest faithfully obeyed the

true religion of God in the past, it behooveth thee tofollow His true religion hereafter, inasmuch as everyreligion proceedeth from God, the Help in Peril, theSelf-Subsisting.

He Who hath revealed the Qur’án unto Mu ammad, theḥApostle of God, ordaining in the Faith of Islám thatwhich was pleasing unto Him, hath likewise revealed theBayán, in the manner ye have been promised, unto Him.Who is your Qá’im [He Who ariseth], your Guide, yourMihdí [One Who is guided], your Lord, Him Whom yeacclaim as the manifestation of God’s most excellenttitles.” (Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad, The Báb, ḥ Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 139.

462 The Báb writes, “God hath indeed sent down this Bookunto Me with Truth that ye may be enabled to recognizethe true names of God, inasmuch as ye have strayed inerror far from the Truth.” (ibid., p. 65).

463 The Báb writes, “O ye concourse of the believers!

Utter not words of denial against Me once the Truth ismade manifest, for indeed the mandate of the Báb hathbefittingly been proclaimed unto you in the Qur’ánaforetime. I swear by your Lord, this Book is verilythe same Qur’án which was sent down in the past.”(ibid., p. 67).

464 Professor Bausani suggests that, “The metaphysics ofthe Báb is similar in certain ways to that of theIsmá‘ílís” (Encyclopaedia of Islam, s.v. “Báb”).Although this statement is correct, the similaritiesbetween the Shaykhís and the Bábís are even greater inrespect to the Báb’s approach, terminology, and hismetaphysics. This matter still requires furtherinvestigation.

465 See Chapter 6, n. 16.466 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, pp. 123–124.467 ibid., p. 89.468 Sayyid ‘Alí Mu ammad, the Báb, ḥ Persian Bayán, p. 195.469 Him Whom God Shall Make Manifest (man yu hiruhu Alláhẓ )

is the title for the “expected one in the works of theBáb. See “Note V. ‘Texts From the Persian BeyánConcerning the High Estate of Him whom God ShallManifest’” in Browne, A Traveller’s Narrative (seechapter 5, n. 74), pp. 347–549.

470 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 104.471 Persian Bayán, p. 130.472 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, pp. 105–106.473 Persian Bayán, pp. 95–96, 98, 156.474 ibid., pp. 235, 281.475 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 89.476 ibid., p. 91.477 ibid., p. 125.478 Professor Bausani, in his article “Báb” (Encyclopaedia

of Islam), considers the contents of the Bayánunder four fundamental points. In describing thesecond one he writes, “The spiritualistic interpreta-tion of the eschatological terms which appear in the

ur’án and other sacred works, such as ‘Paradise’,Ḳ‘Hell’, ‘Death’, ‘Resurrection’, ‘Return’, ‘Judgement’,‘Bridge’ ( iráṢ ṭ), ‘Hour’, etc., all of which allude notonly to the end of the physical world but also to thatof the prophetic cycle. From certain passages it seemsthat it must be understood that the true world beingthat of the spirit, of which the material world isnothing but an exteriorisation, God effectivelydestroys the world at the end of each prophetic cyclein order to re-Create it by the Word of the subsequentprophet; the creative worth of the World is given greatimportance in the Bayán.”

479 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 111.480 ibid., p. 111.481 ibid., p. 117.482 Persian Bayán, p. 81.483 ibid., p. 167.484 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, p. 79.485 ibid., p. 78.486 Persian Bayán, pp. 29–30.487 ibid., pp. 42, 50, 96.488 ibid., pp. 43, 46.489 ibid., pp. 15, 24.490 ibid., p. 29.491 The phrase “the Tree of divine Reality” (shajara-i

aqíqatḥ ) is used for any prophet of God.492 Selections from the Writings of the Báb, pp. 106–107.493 ibid., p. 109. The phrase “the Primal Tree” (shajara-i

awwalíya) is used for any prophet of God.494 ibid., p. 78.