background

Sunday, July 6, 2014

Ibadhism, The Cinderella of Islam (Chapter5)


CHAPTER 5
The Imamate

          The institution of Imamate is a historical one; it no longer exists although the system, in its hereditary form, still continues among the Shia sects where Imams trace their ancestry back through Imam Ali to the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him). For the Ibadhis the institution is essential if we are to implement Islamic laws as laid down in the Holy Qur'an and in the Traditions of the Holy messenger. There are attempts to revive the system, but it is doubtful they will ever succeed in view of the separatist tendencies of some fanatical sects which reject any efforts to unify Muslims of various schools. Islamic unity is a pre-requisite for the institution to function effectively. The reason why it broke down is partly due to the formation of dozens of sects each promoting its own religious doctrines some of which were hostile to the Caliphate. The Ibadhis’ views on the establishment of the institution are at variance with those held by some other sects. For the Ibadhis, an Imam must have the following qualifications: -
The Imam must be a mature male of outstanding intelligence. He must not be blind, deaf senile, nor lack limbs which would prevent him from taking part in the obligation of war (jihad) … He must not be mad, feeble minded, nor should he be envious, cowardly, mean, a liar, nor a man who fails to keep promises and agreements, nor indeed possess any other characteristic that causes concern. He must be a man of great learning, for without learning and perception how could he carry out his duties and interpret the laws, and ensure that his subordinates do”.
In other words an Imam must be healthy, God-fearing and well versed in Islamic law. (Dr. Isam Al-Rawas p.104).
          So the Ibadhi’s ideas of Imam differ from those of some other Islamic schools. We cannot find such a person if the institution is hereditary, the less so if he is expected actively to participate in jihad wars and at the same time be an impartial judge of legal disputes that arise among the Muslims in their daily lives. So the following questions arise: -

Must an Imam be a Quraishi or an Elected one?
          The first four successors to the Prophet (Peace be upon him) were Quraishis and so were Umayyad and Abbasid rulers who succeeded them. The first two were nominated by their predecessors before their deaths, while the latter two were appointed by Shura (i.e. consultation) with leading members of the Quraishi tribe. The Umayyad and Abbasid rulers who succeeded them were usurpers who took over the leadership initially by force and then passed it over to their offspring by inheritance. There are several of the Prophet’s hadiths on this issue but let us take only one of them narrated by both Al-Tirmidhi and Imam Ahmad: -
Sovereignty is (invested) in the Qureishis, administration of justice in the Medinites and (privilege of) making calls for prayers in the Habeshis”.
The inference to be drawn from the hadith is that it gives the Quraishis preference to the Imamate; it does not necessarily prove that the appointments of other than Quraishis to the office would not be legitimate. The same is true of appointment of judges from Medina and of callers for prayers from among the Habeshis. The hadith is nowhere fully implemented today.
          The Ibadhis favour appointment of Imams by Shura as was done in the case of the latter two of the rightly – guided Khalifas (الخلفاء الراشدين). The choice of Imam should be done by consultation among religious scholars including tribal leaders in order to give added weight to his authority when he comes to power. This method should ensure that the candidate possesses the requisite attributes outlined above.
          The first Ibadhi Imam was appointed in Hadhramut in the year 129 H (747 CE); he was Abdullah bin Yahya Al-Kindi. This was followed by another appointment, five years later, of Julanda bin Masoud Al-Ma’awaly as Imam of Oman (l34 H). The third Imam was elected in Maghrib in North Africa and the choice fell on Abu-l- Khattab in 140 H. These appointments were made in co-ordination with the Ibadhi headquarters in Basra under the leadership of Abu Ubaida Muslim bin Abi Karima Al Tamimi, student and successor to Jabir bin Zayd, the spiritual founder of Ibadhism.
          The establishment of these imamates took place at a time when the Umayyad rule was collapsing and before the Abbasid dynasty was in full control of the State. The Ibadhis had been waiting for such an opportunity and when it presented itself they grabbed it. They have however been criticized for allowing an establishment of three Imamates at about the same period, and we should reply that the Quraishis themselves at one time maintained three Khalifates: the Umayyad dynasty ruling in Spain, the Abassid family ruling from Baghdad and the Fatimids in Egypt and other parts of North Africa. The Fatimids were Ismailis who founded the city of Cairo and built the Al Azhar mosque which became a famous center of learning.

Should Muslims revolt against a tyrant Imam?
          The Ibadhis do not encourage revolts against their Imams to avoid bloodshed. It is justifiable only as a last resort and in extreme circumstances. The history of Ibadhi Imamate in Oman speaks for itself as following list shows:-

   
     Name of Imam
Period of Rule
How he died
1.  Julanda ibn Masoud Al-Ma’awaly
132 – 134 H.
Killed in fighting with Abbasid invaders.

2.  Rashid bin Nadhar Al Julandi
134 – 177 H.
Overthrown (had been installed by Abbasids).

3.  Muhammad bin Affan
177 – 179 H.
Deposed.
4.  Al-Warith bin Ka’b
179 – 192 H.
Drowned in Wadi rescue operation.

5.  Ghassan bin Abdullah
192 – 208 H.
Natural death
6.  Abdul Malik Humaid
208 – 226 H.
Natural death
7.  Muhanna bin Jayfar
226 – 237 H.
Natural death
8.  Al-Salt bin Malik
237 – 273 H.
Deposed
9.  Rashid bin Nadhar Al Yahmady
273 – 277 H.
Deposed
10.           Azzan bin Tamim Al-Kharusi
277 – 280 H.
Killed in fighting with Abbasid Aggressors.




          From the above picture one can see that none of Ibadhi Imams was assassinated. The first and the last Imams were killed by Abbasid aggressors. The others died naturally or were deposed as a result of pressure from the people. Their rule extended over a total period of about 150 years. This is in contrast with the Umayyad rulers when seven of them were murdered, and during the Abbasid reign the same number of rulers were also killed and three others were tortured and blinded under savage conditions. And yet some so-called Islamic scholars and historians have the impudence to say that Ibadhis are Khawarij who are terrorists and shedders of blood. According to Dr. Amr Khalifa Ennami (Ibadhiyah, p.33), Abdullah bin Yahya Al-Kindi, the first Ibadhi Imam of Hadhramawt and Yemen, in the second century H, in his letter of commission to his Governor, Abd Al-Rahman bin Muhammad issued the following directions:- 
We do not block people’s way and murder them on sight without inviting them first to realize the truth. But we invite them to the truth. He who accepts it enjoys all the rights that the Muslims enjoy, and is subject to all their obligations. He who denies the truth and fights us, we fight him and ask God to give us support against him”.
Abdullah bin Yahya further writes:-
“This is our policy. We do not punish the innocent for the guilty, the good for the evil, the woman for the man, or the young for the old. We do not slay people on sight without calling them to the truth, and making it clear to them”. (p.34).  
He continues:-
“… …He who fights us, we fight him back, and inspect his property in order to return it to its owners ... ... No booty or captives should be taken from the people of the Qiblah (i.e. Muslims), for they are not like polytheists whose property is to be despoiled and their women and children to be taken captives. But the people of Qiblah are two parties of which one summons to what is right, holding fast to it, and the other summons to injustice and persists in it”. (p.34).
          Dr. Amr further explains that the above statements describe Ibadhi policy throughout their history, whereas the policy of murdering opponents without previous warning was the distinguishing mark of the Azraqis all times. It was also one of the main issues which made the Ibadhis oppose the Azraqis and other extreme Kharijites such as the Najdat and Sufriyah (p.28 – 30). And it should be added that the murdering of opponents was not just the distinguishing mark of the extreme Khawarij but also of the Umayyad. Abbasid and Fatimid rulers.
          When Imam Abdullah bin Yahya Al Kindy wrote that letter to his Govemor he must have had in mind the atrocious activities of the notorious Al Hajjaj who had been the Governor of Basra during the reign of Umayyad ruler Abdul Malik bin Marwan (65 – 86 H.) and lived up to the reign of his son Al Walid (86 – 96H.). According to Jalaluddin Assuyuti, in the year 74 H, Al-Hajjaj went to Medina and harassed its people there and looked down upon the surviving Sahabas like anas, Jabir bin Abdullah and Sahl bin Sa’ad Al Sa’ady and sealed (stamped) them on their necks and hands, thus humiliating them (p.190). Assuyuti further reports (p.199) that among the prominent people who died during the reign of Al Walid bin Abdul Malik was:-
سعيد بن جبير (الذي مات) شهيدا, قتله الحجاج لعنة الله
“Said bin Jubair (who died a martyr) was killed by Al Hajjaj, may Allah damn him”.
          After the year 81 H. Al Hajjaj sent several military expeditions to subjugate the people of Oman and, humiliate its people. So Abdullah bin Yahya Al-Kindy did not want his governor to behave like Al-Hajjaj, the tyrant. Those were the kind of rulers who were terrorizing the Muslim population, and the Ibadhis were one of the groups which were fighting against them to establish a just and true Islamic society.
          Having said all that, it is worth remembering what has been started before that although the ibadhis consider the system of Imamate as essential in an Islamic society in order to implement Islamic sharia, for the majority of Muslims the institution has for all intents and purposes fallen into disuse. The subject has been brought up for discussion simply to defend the Ibadhi stand on the system because other writers have raised it without explaining the reasons behind it so that non-Ibadhi readers are left wandering in the wild with biased views against the madh-hab.
          Ian Skeet who stayed in Oman for two years from 1966 to 1968 in his book, Muscat & Oman, The End of an Era, made the following comments on the Ibadhi Imamate (p.92).
“Ibadhi philosophy contains elements of democracy, although in practice it has turned out conservatively traditional to the point of being reactionary. Ibadhis believe for instance, in the election of the Imam by the whole community that he should rule with the advice and consent of his people and that, if he loses popular support, he may be deposed. Ibadhis differ from most other Islamic communities, who have Imams or Caliphs within their system, in their belief that it is not necessary to have an uninterrupted succession of rulers; if there is no suitable candidate, then the office can remain vacant”.   
The history of Ibadhi Imams as summarized above in the Table of imams in this chapter bears witness to Ian Skeet’s comments on the system.

>>>>>> (To be Continued)


Reference:
Ibadhism, The Cinderella of Islam, by Soud H. Al Ma'awaly, pg: 50-56

No comments:

Post a Comment