Sects of the Jarudiyyah of Yemen

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

Sects of the Jarudiyyah of Yemen

 

Hardly a hundred years passed since the arrival of Imam al Mahdi Yahya ibn al Hussain to Yemen and his followers split—after having already transformed to the Jarudiyyah[1]—to three sects, as Imam al Mahdi Ahmed ibn Yahya al Murtada explained in his saying:

 

وافترق متأخروا الجارودية إلى مطرفية وحسينية ومخترعة

The later Jarudiyyah sect split into Muttarrifiyyah, Hussainiyyah, and Mukhtari’ah.[2]

 

This confirms what Nashwan ibn Sa’id al Himyari explicitly stated:

 

إنه ليس باليمن من فرق الزيدية غير الجارودية وهم بصنعاء وصعدة وما يليها

There are no Zaidiyyah sects in Yemen other than the Jarudiyyah, and they are in San’a’, Sa’dah, and the surrounding areas.[3]

 

Imam al Mansur ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah also said that the Zaidiyyah are the Jarudiyyah, and there is no known Imam after Zaid alayh ‘rahimahu Llah who is not a Jarudi, nor their followers.[4]

This judgment is further confirmed by the historian and scholar Muhammad ibn Ismail al Kibsi (d. 1308 AH), the author of al Lata’if al Saniyyah, in his book al Nafahat al Miskiyyah[5] in the biography of the Jurist Ahmed ibn Ahmed al Hamli, whom he described, “This jurist follows the path of the early Shia, deeply loyal to the Wasi of the Messenger of Allah, detesting those who opposed him. He had great love for our master (referring to Imam al Mutawakkil Muhsin ibn Ahmed (d. 1295 AH)) and his belief was sincere and his affiliation correct. He constantly spoke the word of truth. Even though he was blind, his insight was illuminated, and his character was pure. He was from the Jarudiyyah Shia, who are, in truth, the purest of the Zaidiyyah and the followers of the noble progeny. They are the ones who follow the path of the Imams of the Household.”

This is an explanation of the Jarudiyyah sub-sects:

 

1. The Hussainiyyah

Attributed to al Hussain ibn al Qasim ibn ‘Ali al ‘Iyyani, who claimed Imamah for himself in the year 393 AH/1002 CE, adopting the title al Mahdi. He alleged that he was the awaited Mahdi prophesied by the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and claimed to be superior to the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, asserting that his words and writings were better than the Qur’an and more illuminating in revealing meanings, as well as in silencing opponents. As al Hujuri mentioned in al Rawdah, “He was above the celestial realm but below divinity.” He demanded khums (one-fifth)—conforming their servitude—from people in everything, including jewellery and wealth, even from slaves and maidservants, and a third of other things such as grains. Those who complied with him were accepted, otherwise, he would treat them like Jews, imposing Jizyah upon them and confiscating their weapons. Those who resisted were killed and crucified. He was ultimately killed by the Hamdan tribe in Dhu Gharar in the Bawn plain north of San’a’ in Safar 404 AH/1013 CE. His followers erected a tomb at the site of his death, claiming he was buried there. The Shia gather there annually on the 18^th of Dhu al Hijjah to celebrate the famous Day of Ghadir. The Shia of Yemen continue to celebrate this occasion to this day. His followers believe that he is the awaited al Mahdi, who is alive and did not die, and will not die until he fills the earth with justice. They believe that anyone who does not believe the same as them will reside in Hell.

His followers and supporters later split into two groups: one group claimed he came to them in secret and did not cease visiting them during his absence and that they did nothing without his command. The other group refuted this, saying he would not be seen again until his reappearance and uprising, and that they only acted based on what he had previously instructed in his books. They have many strange sayings, such as the validity of Tayammum (dry ablution) despite the presence of water.[6] This sect persisted until the eighth century AH, then vanished.[7]

 

2. The Muttarrifiyyah[8]

A sect named after Muttarrif ibn Shihab, a notable figure from the late fourth and early fifth centuries AH. They were followers of Imam al Hadi Yahya ibn al Hussain and adhered to his school of thought in legal matters. They did not permit deviation from his teachings and believed in the legitimacy of individual ijtihad (independent reasoning) only when it aligned with his views. Consequently, they prohibited departing from his school of thought.[9] When they realised that Imam al Mansur ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah had deviated from al Hadi in some legal issues, they condemned him for it. This condemnation was one of the causes of discord between them, despite his statement, “We revere the texts of al Hadi as we revere the texts of the Qur’an.”[10] The Muttarrifiyyah were highly dedicated to knowledge, diligently engaged in study, and sincere in their obedience and worship. They were known for their asceticism, surpassing all others of their time.[11]

As for their principles, they followed the Mu’tazilah school, adhering to figures such as al Hadi and Abu al Qasim al Balkhi. However, they declared the belief in the creation of the four elements—water, earth, air, and fire—and in the reaction of everything else[12], because they believed that the effect of Allah is in the origins of things, not their branches. They also differed from the Zaidiyyah in one of their fundamental principles, Imamah. They did not require lineage for whoever takes it, as the Zaidiyyah did. Their view aligns with the opinion that “the Imamah is permissible for all people and not restricted to a particular group; it is deserved by virtue, demand, and consensus of the council.” This is the view held by Ibrahim ibn Sayyar al Nazzam and those who agreed with him from the Mu’tazilah and others. As stated in their saying, “The Imamah is for the most honourable and best among the people before Allah.” They supported this with Allah’s words: O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.[13] He called upon all His creation, red and black, Arab and non-Arab, not favouring one over another, and said: Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you.[14] Therefore, the one who is most pious and most honourable to Him, the most knowledgeable of Allah, and most knowledgeable in His obedience is the most deserving of the Imamah and leadership among His creation, whether Arab or non-Arab.[15]

However, this opinion did not appeal to Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah. He did not accept the Muttarrifiyyah’s ijtihad in this matter and excommunicated by the principle of ilzam (which is to hold another accountable for something he said, which he did not actually say). He equated their status to that of the belligerents, making their blood and property permissible, destroying their homes and Masjids, and ruling that their Masjids were Masjids of harm.[16] He called them Rawafid[17] despite the fact that they were his followers and adherents, committed to his congregation and community after pledging allegiance to him following his claim to Imamah.[18]

Since Nashwan ibn Sa’id al Himyari’s belief aligned with the Muttarrifiyyah’s view on the validity of Imamah for those not descended from the two [noble] lines, Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah ruled against him as he did against the Muttarrifiyyah. When Nashwan declared himself Imam, Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah said:

 

أما الذي عند جدودي فيه فيقطعون لسنه من فيه

ويؤتمون ضحوة بنيه إذ صار حق الغير يدعيه

As for the one who claims the right of my forefathers, they will cut his tongue from his mouth,

And seek to sacrifice his sons; since it is the right of another that he claims.

3. The Mukhtari’ah

A sect known by this name for their belief that Allah creates (ikhtira’) the attributes in bodies and that they do not occur naturally, as the Muttarrifiyyah claimed. They also believe in the Imamah of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu by explicit designation, considering the Sahabah to be in error for giving precedence to him and opposing that explicit designation, and suspended ruling them to be sinful.[19]

They also believe that the sweat of a menstruating woman is impure, as ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al Fakhri mentioned in his book Talkhis al Bayan (pg. 112), proceeding to refute them, saying, “I said: This is invalid and obviously wrong. The Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam used to spend the night with his wives in their beds and take whatever he needed from their hands, whether moist or dry. If the bodies of menstruating women and those in a state of major ritual impurity were impure, he would not have done that. And the opponent acknowledges that the body of a menstruating woman and one in a state of major ritual impurity are pure; however, he erred in declaring sweat and similar things impure. The consensus is that the sweat of a menstruating woman in areas other than the place of impurity is pure, as is the sweat of one in a state of major ritual impurity.”

There was a severe and bitter dispute between them and the Muttarrifiyyah, which ended with the demise of the Muttarrifiyyah at the hands of Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah. The leader of the Mukhtari’ah was ‘Ali ibn Shahr from the family of Aklab in the Bawn plain north of San’a’, and he followed Abu Hashim al Balkhi.[20] This sect is what the Hadawiyyah in Yemen follow to this day.

Additionally, al Sharif ‘Abdul Samad[21] ibn ‘Abdullah al Damaghani[22] added other matters concerning the Zaidiyyah, stating: “As for what is criticised about the Zaidiyyah, there are many matters.”

One of them is their belief—shared with most of the Mu’tazilah—that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will not intercede for the sinners of the Ummah. This is contrary to reason and tradition. Reason clearly indicates this without doubt; for the sinner in the Hereafter is like a drowning person in the sea who needs to be rescued, while the obedient one is like someone on land who is safe and wants to ascend to a higher level. The drowning person is more deserving of being rescued than elevating the safe person. The virtue of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam surpassing all other prophets will not be made apparent in the Hereafter—and his Ummah surpassing all other nations—except through that praised station (al Maqam al Mahmud), his intercession, and the Pond (al Hawd) he will be given. As for the narrations, there are many ahadith affirming that intercession is granted to the sinners of the Ummah. Among them is the hadith used by the Mu’adhin in his supplication before the Iqamah, “O Allah, raise him to the Praised Station that You promised him, and make him an intercessor for his Ummah,” as he instructed the Mu’adhin to say this. The Zaidiyyah’s reliance on the verse: And they cannot intercede except for him with whom He is pleased, and they stand in awe for fear of Him,[23] and the verse: For the wrongdoers there will be no devoted friend and no intercessor [who is] obeyed,[24] is invalid because these refer to the disbelievers, for whom there is no intercession by consensus.

They also believe—another belief they share with the Mu’tazilah—that a person does not enter Paradise except by his deeds. This is far-fetched. What value do his deeds—if sincere—have compared to his sins, and compared to the favours of Allah upon him? How can the impurities of deeds, which are beyond counting, be overlooked? The entire hadith indicates that Paradise is deserved only through forgiveness and mercy, not merely by deeds. The Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wanted to affirm this to his Ummah by saying:

 

لا يدخل أحد الجنة بعمله

None of you will enter Paradise by his deeds.

 

They asked, “Not even you, O Messenger of Allah?” He replied:

 

ولا أنا إلا أن يتغمدني الله بعفوه

Not even me, unless Allah envelops me with His forgiveness.[25]

 

He has been forgiven for his past and future sins, despite being infallible and not committing anything that would warrant Hellfire. He intended for his Ummah to understand this, though it is said that mercy and forgiveness come with deeds, as Allah says, Indeed, the mercy of Allah is near to the doers of good[26], not to the rebellious.

Additionally, they, along with some of the Mu’tazilah, believe that many who disagree with them in doctrine are disbelievers and fight them as they would polytheists. This contradicts the Prophetic law, for the ahadith affirm that one who professes the two testimonies, his wealth and blood are protected. Some of the Ahlus Sunnah also hold this belief like them, such as the Malikis, who declare the one who curses a Companion a disbeliever, deeming his execution to be mandatory.[27] [However,] They have no evidence for this; since the Companions fell into disputes among themselves during the turmoil, both with hands and tongues, as was the case with ‘Ali and Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. The reason is the same, which is the attack on a Companion: the sin is indeed great regardless of who commits it and the insignificant does not reach the level of the great regardless of who commits it. And no one from the Ummah says that some Companions became disbelievers because they attacked another Companion in any case.

Additionally, amongst their beliefs, they stipulate such conditions for the Caliphate, majority of which the Shari’ah has not stipulated. They also apply these conditions to the Imam of the Salah. This is why they do not maintain an Imam for long due to the lack of fulfilling all the conditions.

Moreover, they allow for two Caliphs in one time, if their territories are far apart, like al Nasir al Atrush in Persia and al Hadi in Yemen. They believe that the decree of each one is valid, even if one of them issues a fatwa for killing the other. This is a great crime in the religion, contrary to clear and evident proof. It has been authentically reported from the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

 

إذا قام خليفتان فاقتلوا الآخر منهما

When two Caliphs are given allegiance, kill the latter of them.[28]

 

This is because it divides the affairs of the Ummah, scatters their word, disrupts their system, and diminishes their unity, weakening them and enabling the enemy to overpower them. Hence, it is said in the proverb, “Two swords in one sheath do not meet.”

Also, they and most of the Mu’tazilah have little belief in the righteousness of the pious, denying many of their miracles and disparaging them.

They also have obsessive doubts in their wudu’, salah, and beliefs, all of which are contrary to the Shari’ah.

Furthermore, they contradict their Imam, Zaid ibn ‘Ali rahimahu Llah, in most branches of jurisprudence, despite their affiliation with him, and claim that they follow the branches of his followers, just as the Shafi’iyyah follow the branches of al Shafi’i’s followers, the Malikiyyah follow the branches of Malik’s followers, and the Hanafiyyah follow the branches of Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Shaybani, Abu Yusuf, and Zufar, the followers of Abu Hanifah. This is not correct, because the followers of each jurist who transmitted from him added to the branches of their Imam, expanded on them, and refined what was authentic among them. The Zaidiyyah did not do this in the jurisprudence of Zaid ibn ‘Ali rahimahu Llah but treated him like any other opposing jurist in legal issues. They made their main sources in the school of thought three Imams: two from the descendants of al Hassan[29] and one from the descendants of al Hussain[30].

All of them are followers of Zaid in beliefs and Imamah, and their branches agree with the Hanafi school more than with other jurists.

The regions where they can be found and where they hold influence include Gilan and Deylam in Persia, some parts of Gorgan, Isfahan, Rayy, and upper Iraq such as Kufah and Anbar.[31] In Hijaz, they can be found in Makkah and all other cities of Hijaz except Madinah, where the influence belongs to the Twelvers.[32] They are in Najd of Yemen, prevailing in its cities such as San’a’, Sa’dah, and Dhamar, and similar places. They are also present in its plains, in cities like Khulay and the region between Khulay and Yemen, including the district of Mikhlaf.

Among them in Morocco are many groups in the mountains known as Aurès, and they have mingled in Sunni cities, concealing themselves under the Hanafi school of thought. This is because Abu Hanifah was one of the supporters of Zaid ibn ‘Ali rahimahu Llah. They are more righteous than the Shia, were it not for what is criticised about them.[33]

 

NEXT⇒ The Zaidis of Yemen and the Extent of their Connection to the Zaidi Sect of Imam Zaid ibn ‘Ali 

---

[1] All of his followers were not from the Jarudiyyah. Some of them withheld from cursing the Rightly Guided Khalifas. In fact, among them are those who praise them and seek approval for them. Al Imam al Hadi himself commanded to lash those who curse Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma as narrated by Qadi Ahmed ibn Sa’id al Rab’ani and Qadi al Imam al Mansur ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah. This report is reported by the Historian Yahya ibn al Hussain ibn al Imam al Qasim in Tabaqat al Zaidiyyah al Sughra al Mustatab where he says, “Ibn al Wazir narrated in his footnotes, al Hidayah, al Hijri quotes it in his book Majmu’ Buldan Yaman wa Qaba’iliha, 1/376, Yahya ibn al Hussain also mentions in his history, Anba’ al Mu’min, in the reports of the year 569 AH the words, ‘The Zaidiyyah al Mukhtari’ah and Muttarrifiyyah are unanimous that ‘Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha is the wife of the Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in Jannat and that it is not permissible to curse Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and other Sahabah. This was in the Jami’ Masjid of Da’ar.’ Al Sayed Ibrahim ibn Muhammad al Wazir mentioned it like this in the footnotes of al Hidayah. He said: ‘Upon this is the signature of al Qadi Jafar ibn ‘Abdul Salam and his testimony. And Allah knows best.’”

Similarly, Hassan ibn Ahmed, known as ‘Akish, mentioned in his book al Dibaj al Khusrawani words quoted from al Imam ‘Abdullah ibn Hamzah in his book al Shafi the gist of which is, “Whoever attributes to any of our forefathers curse of the Sahabah who were before ‘Ali is a liar.” He writes in the answer of al Masa’il al Niha’iyyah after praising the early Sahabah and enumerating their specialities, his words, “This is our stance. We have not emitted them wrongly or concealed besides them any merit. It is below our dignity to swear, curse, and insult. We exonerate ourselves before Allah from its practice.”

One of the renowned Imams of Yemen who defended the Sahabah is Imam Yahya ibn Hamzah in his book al Risalah al Wazi’ah li al Mu’tadin ‘an Sabb Sahabat Sayed al Mursilin. He brought for him Yahya ibn Muzaffar (d. 875 AH) in his book al Bayan, which is one of the most significant books of the Zaidi Hadawi juristic school a statement on his belief on the Sahabah, like, “The issue of Imam Yahya, it is not correct to perform Salah behind one who curses the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum who were before ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu,” and he did not mention any dispute on the topic.

Among the Imams, scholars, mujtahids is al Imam Muhammad ibn al Mutahhar ibn Yahya (d. 729 AH). He was with the Sunnah except that he would abstain from proclaiming it out of fear for the hooligans as appears in his statement, “Raising the hands, folding them, and reciting amin is our school as well as the school of the Ahlul Bayt, Companions, and Jurists. I do not leave it, by Allah, out of annoyance. However, I fear the fools attacking my honour.”

The Historian Yahya ibn al Hussain ibn al Qasim mentioned in his book Bahjat al Zaman that his grandfather al Imam al Qasim stopped cursing the Sahabah of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the Rightly Guided Khalifas at the end of his life as appears in his treatise called al Shajarah.

Among the latter Imams who condemned the cursing of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was Imam Ibn Muhammad Humaid al Din (d. 1367 AH/1948 CE). This condemnation came about when the poet ‘Abdur Rahman ibn ‘Abdullah al Saqqaf al Hadrami sent him a poem praising him in which he curses some of the Companions, in his statement, “We are for the religion with you, and if we remember what you endured in your struggles, it should not hide our affection for you, nor should the hearts harbour malice. We argue against the fools about you, defending your honour. When your stories are told, we almost dance from joy. May Allah repeatedly bless the Messenger’s progeny and Companions. So, who is just on the day the Arabs understand their emergence, as your emergence to them is like a rescue for the villages.”

In his response, Ibn Humaid al Din clearly articulated his creed when the poet sought to know it, expressing his pride in the way of the Companions and his discontent with disparaging them. He said of himself, “A man who has in the palace of Shari’ah Ahmed. They are the pinnacle, the highest of the highest, through the Book, without dispute or argument. He calls to the Arabs with all might, adhering to the pure Sunnah, unshakably. He is never swayed by the beliefs of the Rawafid, who dishonour the Sunnah of those who followed. Honour be to the Sunnah, who never wavered. Their example is never tarnished by such beliefs.”

As for the scholars other than the Imams who did not follow the Jarudiyyah in their claims, they are many, praise be to Allah. Among them, sufficient is the mention of some, like Sarim al Din Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn al Hadi ibn Ibrahim al Wazir (d. 914 AH). He mentioned in al Bassamah about some of the Companions after the death of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the disputes around who would succeed him, and he supplicated for approval for the three Khalifas, Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhum in his saying, “Seek approval for them as Abu al Hassan sought. Abstain from curse if you are careful.”

As for the Rafidah from among the Jarudiyyah, the scholar-poet Ahmed ibn al Hassan Barakat al Dawlah addressed them with the proper stance, in 1196 AH, saying, “Come to us, O brothers of Rafd. If you have the quality of fairness in din like our din. We praised ‘Ali more than you did. You cursed the Companions of Ahmed, not us. You said that the truth is what you claim. Has al Rahman not cursed the most deviant of us?”

Imam al Shawkani further clarified this meaning, saying, “Extremely repulsive, by the life of your father, is the faith of the Rafidah. They spread it everywhere persistently and omitted the certainty of his virtues. They cursed the Companions of Taha, without hesitation, and opposed all who opposed them. And they claimed their religion to be a righteous one; may Allah curse the liars.”

[2] Al Munyah wa al Amal, pg. 97.

[3] Sharh Risalat al Hur al ‘In.

[4] Dr. Muhammad ibn Muhammad al Hajj Hassan al Kamali: Imam al Mahdi Ahmed ibn Yahya al Murtada, pg. 22; al Risalah al Mudihah li al Haqq al Rafi’ah li al Talbis ‘an al Khalq, tablet 6.

[5] Manuscript, Arabic Library.

[6] Al Mustatab, tablet: 59.

[7] Sharh Risalat al Hur al ‘In, pg. 156-157; al ‘Awasim wa al Qawasim, 3/421; al Fada’il; Anba’ al Zaman, fi Akhbar Sanah 401 AH; Tabaqat al Zaidiyyah (al Mustatab); Matla’ al Budur, as an excursus in the biography of al Qasim ibn al Hussain al Zaidi and the biography of Muhammad ibn Jafar ibn al Qasim.

[8] Professor Wilfred Madelung wrote a research paper on this sect in English and sent me a copy. I asked the Egyptian professor Faruq ‘Askar to translate it into Arabic when he was working at the General Authority for Antiquities and Libraries during my presidency of it.

[9] Al Fada’il.

[10] Imam al Qasim ibn Muhammad: Al Irshad. Also mentioned in the chapters on inheritance in the section about relatives (regarding the paternal uncle and the maternal aunt). This was pointed out to me by the scholar Ahmed ibn ‘Ali al ‘Ansi, the former Deputy Chief of Appeals.

[11] Al Fada’il.

[12] Al ‘Awasim wa al Qawasim, 5/268.

[13] Surah al Hujurat: 13.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Sharh Risalat al Hur al ‘In, pg. 152.

[16] Al Fada’il.

[17] ‘Abbas ibn Mansur al Burayhi in al Burhan fi Ma’rifat ‘Aqa’id Ahl al Iman, pg. 67; As’ad ibn ‘Abdullah al Bali’i in al Firaq al Thintayn wa Sab’in, pg. 76; Abu Muhammad al Yamani in al Firaq, pg. 145, and ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al Fakhri in Talkhis al Bayan fi Dhikr Firaq Ahl al Adyan, pg. 196, mentioned that the Muttarrifiyyah distinguished themselves by saying that praying in a garment other than the one worn by the worshipper is sound religion, cursing the pious predecessors is great reward, and they were among the most extreme of the Zaidiyyah in their cursing.

[18] Al Fada’il.

[19] Al Munyah wa al Amal, pg. 99.

[20] Al Fada’il.

[21] He was one of the prominent figures of the sixth century AH or earlier and authored his treatise al Jawharah al Khalisah ‘an al Shawa’ib fi al ‘Aqa’id al Manqumah ‘ala Jami’ al Mazahib. This was in response to Sheikh ‘Abdul Haqq ibn ‘Abdul Majid ibn ‘Abdul Wahid al Dhahabi. When Imam al Mujtahid Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al Wazir reviewed this treatise, he wrote in his own hand on the title page, “I have reflected on the words of this book during dictation and study, and found it unparalleled, with no equal in elegance and perfection. May Allah reward al Sharif, for he excelled in the quality of classification and the beauty of description. He is worthy of the saying, ‘The people, a thousand of them like one, and one like a thousand if there be a command. And it is not astonishing for Allah to gather the world in one.”

[22] This refers to Damaghan, a large town between Rayy and Qumis. (Mujam al Buldan.)

[23] Surah al Anbiya’: 28.

[24] Surah Ghafir: 18.

[25] Sahih al Bukhari, 5/2147, Hadith: 5349, but it does not include “by his forgiveness.”

[26] Surah al A’raf: 56.

[27] Some Maliki scholars have mentioned to me that this ruling is specific to certain Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum whose names are clearly indicated in the Qur’an. For example, the Khalifah Abu Bakr, radiya Llahu ‘anhu, is referenced in Allah’s verse, If you do not aid him [i.e., the Messenger]—Allah has already aided him when those who disbelieved had driven him out as one of two, when they were in the cave and he said to his companion, “Do not grieve; indeed Allah is with us.” (Surah al Tawbah: 40.) Likewise, ‘Aisha, the Mother of the Believers radiya Llahu ‘anha, is exonerated by Allah in Surah al Nur from the slander against her, in His saying: Indeed, those who came with falsehood are a group among you… until His saying: That Day, Allah will give them their deserved recompense in full, and they will know that it is Allah who is the manifest Truth. (Surah al Nur: 11-25.)

[28] Sahih Muslim, 3/1480, Hadith: 1853, with the wording:

إذا بويع لخليفتين فاقتلوا الآخر منهما

When allegiance is sworn to two Caliphs, kill the latter of them.

[29] They are al Mu’ayyad al Kabir Ahmed ibn al Hussain ibn Harun, mentioned previously, and his brother Abu Talib Yahya ibn al Hussain, who passed away in Amil in the year 424 AH.

[30] He is al Nasir al Atrush al Hassan ibn ‘Ali, also mentioned previously.

[31] The inhabitants of some of these regions have become Twelvers (Imamiyyah).

[32] This was during the time of al Damaghani, the author of al Jawharah al Khalisah, also known as Risalat al Damaghani. However, today, the inhabitants of these regions are from the Ahlus Sunnah, praise be to Allah. This transformation occurred during the reign of the just king Nur al Din Mahmud Zangi rahimahu Llah who promoted Sunni Islam in Aleppo, as mentioned by al Maqrizi in al Dhahab al Masbuk, page 68. Its inhabitants were previously Rafidah, and he abolished from the Adhan, saying of the phrase Hayya ‘ala khayr al ‘amal in 543 AH and established schools for the four Sunni schools of thought. Subsequently, during the reign of Salah al Din al Ayyubi rahimahu Llah who played a crucial role in expelling the Crusader Franks from the Levant, he also succeeded in abolishing the Fatimid state, which had ruled North Africa, Egypt, and the Levant, extending its influence to Hijaz and later Yemen through the Sulayhid state. This was in retaliation and alignment, as the Fatimids had allied with the Franks to retake Jerusalem and enabled their control over regions of the Levant as mentioned by the German Historian Adolf Friesen in his book Medita pg. 97 that Jeffrey of Bouillon, leader of the First Crusade, received a delegation from the Fatimid Khalifah al Mustansir while besieging Antioch. This delegation formed an alliance against the Seljuks, and upon their return to Cairo, they were accompanied by a group of Frankish princes. The agreement included sending a Fatimid army to Jerusalem to capture it from the Seljuks, which was achieved in August 1098 CE. The Franks played their role in this, with their first campaign reaching Jerusalem and killing its inhabitants. (Dr. Suhayl Zakkar: Al Mawsu’at al Shamilah fi Tarikh al Hurub al Salibiyyah, 29/329-333). This left the bitterness of the defeat of the Crusader armies lingering in the hearts of the Franks and their descendants until General Gouraud, the French commander, entered Damascus after World War I. He went to the tomb of Salah al Din al Ayyubi rahimahu Llah and said, “Salah al Din, we have returned. My name is Gouraud, the descendant of Jeffrey. The Crusades have ended now.” (Malik Bennabi: Mudhakirat Shahid al Qarn, pg. 40.) It is also narrated that General Gouraud kicked Salah al Din’s tomb with his foot, saying, “We have returned, Salah al Din.” Furthermore, it is mentioned that the British General Allenby, upon entering Jerusalem, declared, “Now the Crusades have ended.”

[33] This was during the time of al Damaghani. As for today, majority of the ‘Alawis affiliated in school to Zaid ibn ‘Ali and attributed to ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu and those who trace their lineage to him from the people of Yemen—and there are many of them—have turned to Twelver Shi’ism after the Iranian Revolution in 1979 CE, under the guise of the school of Imam Zaid ibn ‘Ali. If the matter was personal to them, it would be less significant, but they actively work to promote this doctrine, propagating it and distributing its books freely, aside from those sold at low prices in specialised bookstores. This is in retaliation against the republican regime that spread education widely throughout Yemen, aiming to unify religious education curricula away from narrow sectarianism, making it acceptable to both Shafi’i and Zaidi followers. This allowed the Ahlus Sunnah in areas dominated by the Zaidi sect to practice their rituals in Masjids openly and freely, without fear or hesitation. Many people voluntarily turned to reading Sunni books, realising that this was the only way to eliminate sectarian differences and unify them with a single heart, erasing from their memory the judgments of some rulers who used to excommunicate and declare others as sinners based on sectarian differences. Among the Alawites, there were those who left taqlid and acted according to the rulings of the Qur’an and the authentic Sunnah, but they turned away from this for political reasons:

But the foolish refuse except to follow desire, even though the path of truth is clear to them.

Even though they know that Imam al Hadi Yahya ibn al Hussain attacked the Jafari doctrine in his books, stating that its followers are not on the right path concerning the infallibility of the Twelve Imams, the doctrine of Taqiyyah (dissimulation), and Bada’ (the idea that Allah only learns of things as they occur, changing His opinion as a result), and their excommunication of other sects’ followers, as mentioned in Rasa’il al ‘Adl wa al Tawhid (pg. 75). If the followers of Imam al Hadi’s school were keen on dispelling the misconception among the followers of the four schools of thought that the Zaidi school does not differ from the Jafari school and that they originate from the same source, they should adhere to what Imam Zaid ibn ‘Ali, rahimahu Llah, who they claim to follow in name, adhered to. They should reject what he rejected, commend what he commended among the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, and practice what is mentioned in Majmu’ Zaid ibn ‘Ali concerning raising and folding the hands in prayer and saying amin.