Abstract
Al-Kulīnī’s al-Rawda—the eighth and last volume of his renowned al-Kāfī—contains an account of a meeting between the sixth Imam Ja‘far al-Sādiq (d. 148/765) and his follower Abū Basīr. The account begins with an introductory passage, in which Abū Basīr tells the Imam that, though he is old and approaching death, he remains ignorant of his fate in the next world. The Imam reassures him that no believer will be punished by God, adding: “This (exemption from punishment) applies only to you (i.e., the Shī‘a), and not to the rest of mankind.” Next, Abū Basīr complains about the term “Rāfida” by which the Shī‘a are addressed by their enemies. Abū Basīr takes it to be a term of abuse, but the Imam explains that it is in fact an honorific.1 He goes on to tell Abū Basīr that since the Shī‘a alone follow the ahl al-bayt (family of the Prophet), God will accept the good deeds of the righteous among them and will forgive the sins of those among them who do evil. The Imam then asks: “Abū Muhammad, have I made you happy?” (hal sarartuka?), to which Abū Basīr replies: “May I be made your ransom, tell me more!” (ju‘iltu fidāka zidnī!). This leads to the main part of the account in which the Imam cites ten different passages from the Qur’ān and explains how each one relates to the Shī‘a. Many of these passages are introduced with the formula: “God has mentioned you in His book” (la-qad dhakarakum allāh fī kitābihi). Each explanation is followed by the Imam asking: “Have I made you happy?” and Abū Basīr responding with “May I be made your ransom, tell me more!” In conclusion, the Imam makes two pronouncements.
I am grateful to Frank Stewart for his helpful comments on this article.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
For more on this see Kohlberg, “The Term ‘Rāfida’ in Imāmī Shīʿī Usage,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 99 (1979): 677–679, reproduced in Kohlberg, Belief and Law in Imāmī Shī‘ism (Aldershot: Variorum, 1991).
For similar pronouncements on Abraham’s religion see, for example, Barqī, Kitab al-mahāsin, ed. Jalāl al-Dīn al-Husaynī al-Muhaddith (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1950), 1:147, nos. 54–56>(i.e., quoted in)
Majlisī, Bihār al-anwār (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1956–74), 68:87–89, nos. 15–17;
Furāt b. Ibrāhīm, Tafsīr Furāt al-Kūfī, ed. Muhammad al-Kāzim (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Nuʿmān, 1992), 2:377, no. 506>Majlisī, 68:98, no. 4;
Kulīnī, al-Kāfī (Tehran: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1955–57), 1:435, no. 91;
Nuʿmān, Sharh al-akhbār fī fadā’il al-a’imma al-athār, ed. Muhammad al-Husaynī al-Jalālī (Beirut: Dār al-Thaqalayn, 1994), 3:484, no. 1400;
Ibn Shahrāshūb, Manaqib āl Abī Tālib (Beirut: Dār al-Adwā’, 1985), 4:132>Majlisī, 46:33, no. 28.
For millat Ibrāhīm see Paret, Der Koran: Kommentar und Konkordanz (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1971), 30–31.
Kulīnī, 8:33–36, no. 6>Majlisī, 68:48–51, no. 93. For al-Kulīnī (or Kulaynī) and his Kāfi see Amir-Moezzi and Ansari, “Muhammad b. Ya‘qūb al-Kulaynī (m. 328 ou 329/939–40 ou 940–41) et son Kitāb al-kāfī. Une introduction,” Studia Iranica 38 (2009): 191–247. As noted by the authors of this article, there is clear-cut evidence that the Rawda formed part of the kafi, despite doubts expressed by some late Twelver Shī‘ī scholars (“Kulaynī,” 232).
See Kishshī, Rijāl al-Kishshī (Karbalā’: Mu’assasat al-A‘lamī li-l-Matbū‘āt, n.d. [1962?]), 153, 206;
Modarressi, Tradition and Survival: A Bibliographical Survey of Early Shī‘ite Literature (one volume to date, Oxford: Oneworld, 2003), 395;
Cf. Kohlberg, “Imam and Community in the Pre-Ghayba Period,” in Authority and Political Culture in Shi‘ism, ed. Said Amir Arjomand, 25–53 (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988), 36, reproduced in Kohlberg, Belief and Law in Imāmī Shī‘ism. That the Abū Basīr of our account is identical with Yahyā b. (Abī) l-Qāsim is maintained in Ardabīlī, Jāmi‘ al-ruwāt (Qum: Maktabat Āyat Allāh al-‘Uzmā al-Mar‘ashi al-Najafī, 1982–83), 2:336. There are several other early Shī‘ī transmitters known by this byname. The best known among them is Abū Muhammad Layth b. al-Bakhtarī al-Murādī, who likewise transmitted from al-Bāqir and al-Sādiq (see Ardabīlī, Jami‘ al-ruwat, 2:34–35;
Ess van Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra W. de Gruyter Berlin and New York 331–332.
van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra [Berlin and New York: W. de Gruyter, 1991–97], 1:331–332; Modarressi, Tradition. 315–316; Sayyārī, Revelation and Falsification: The Kitāb al-qirā’āt of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyārī, ed. Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi [Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2009] [English], 58, no. 5 and index).
Kulīnī, 8:34. In a somewhat different formulation, this also appears as a separate tradition (Kulīnī, 8:304, no. 470 [Yūnus (i.e., b. ʿAbd al-Rahmān)<unidentified transmitter<Abū Basīr]; Najafī, Ta’wīl al-āyāt al-zāhira [Qum: Madrasat al-Imām al-Mahdī, 1987], 528, no. 4 [Yūnus b. ‘Abd al-Rahmān<Abū Basīr]>Katkānī, Kitāb al-burhān fi tafsīr al-qur’an [Tehran: Čāpkhāna-i Āftāb, 1954–55], 4:92, no. 10, Majlisī, 24:209, no. 5). Al-Sādiq is reported to have given the same explanation to his follower Sulaymān b. Mihrān al-Aʿmash (Furāt, 2:376–377, no. 506>Majlisī, 68:97–98, no. 4).
Qummī, Tafsīr, ed. Tayyib al-Mūsawī al-Jazā’irī (Najaf: Matbaʿat al-Najaf, 1966–67), 2:255>Majlisī, 68:78, no. 139.
Kulīnī, 8:35. For this interpretation see also Ibn Mansūr al-Yaman (attrib.), Kitāb al-kashf, ed. Rudolf Strothmann (London: Oxford University Press, 1952), 23.
Kulīnī, 1:423, no. 56>Majlisī, 24:205, no. 3 (with al-Majlisī’s explication), 47:55, no. 93; Ibn Shahrāshūb, 4:400>(in a somewhat different version) Majlisī, 24:257, no. 3. For Zayd al-Shahhām see Modarressi, Tradition. 401–402. Cf. Shādhān b. Jabra’īl, Kitāb al-fadā’ il (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Aʿlamī li-l-Matbūʿāt, 1988), 137 (for Abū Yamāma read Abū Usāma, which is the kunya of Zayd al-Shahhām). There are numerous examples of the same verse being taken as referring to the Imam(s), to the Shīʿa, or to both (cf. Kohlberg, “Imam and Community,” 32).
Kulīnī, 8:35>Huwayzī, Tafsīr nur al-thaqalayn. ed. Hāshim al-Rasūlī al-Mahallātī (Qum: Mu’assasat Ismaʿīliyān, 1991–92), 4:491, no. 70.
It may have formed part of Abū Hamza’s Tafsīr (for which see Modarressi, Tradition, 377) and is cited in Hirz al-Dīn’s attempted reconstruction of the work (Abū Hamza al-Thumālī, Tafsir al-qur’ān al-karim li-Abi Hamza Thābit b. Dinār al-Thumālī, reconstructed by ʿAbd al-Razzāq Muhammad Husayn Hirz al-Dīn [Qum: Matbaʿat al-Hādī, 1999–2000], 287, no. 264).
Tabrisī, Mishkāt al-anwār (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Aʿlamī li-l-Matbū‘āt, 1991), 96; Majlisī, 82:173, no. 6 (from al-Rāwandī’s Da‘awat).
Nuʿmān, Sharh. 3:464–467, no. 1356; Nu‘mān, Da’a’im al-islam, ed. Asaf A. A. Fyzee (Cairo: Dār al-Ma‘ārif, 1963–65), 1:76–78. For al-Nu‘mān see Daftary, “Al-Qādī al-Nuʿmān, Ismāʿīlī Law and Imāmī Shīʿism,” Le shi’isme imamite quarante ans après: Hommage à Etan Kohlberg.. ed. Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, Meir M. Bar-Asher, and Simon Hopkins (Turnhout: Brepols, 2009), 179–186. Many Twelver Shīʿī authors regarded him as one of their own, and often quoted from his works (Daftary, 180–181).
There are conflicting reports as to whether Abū Basīr was born blind or only lost his sight in old age. See Kohlberg, “Vision and the Imams,” Autour du regard: Mélanges Gimaret, ed. Éric Chaumont, with the collaboration of D. Aigle, M. A. Amir-Moezzi, and P. Lory, 125–157 (Louvain-Paris: Peeters, 2003), 141–146.
Ibn Bābawayh, Fadā’il al-shī‘a, ed. (with a Persian translation) Amīr Tawhīdī (Tehran: Intishārāt-i Zurārā, 2002), 56>Majlisī, 68:52. The entire tradition (with a facing Persian translation) appears at 56–64. In referring to this text, al-Katkānī (Katkānī, 2:344, no. 8) says that it is taken from Ibn Bābawayh’s Bishārāt al-shī‘a. This may, in fact, be another title for the Fadā’il (cf. the discussion in Sayyārī [English], 237–238, no. 551). Al-Najafī cites an excerpt from Ibn Bābawayh, but does not reveal from which of his works it is taken (Najafī, 518–519, no. 22). For ʿAbbād b. Sulaymān as a transmitter from Muhammad b. Sulaymān see Ardabīlī, 1:430.
For al-Shaykh al-Mufīd see EI 2. s.v. “al-Mufīd” (W. Madelung); Tamima Bayhom-Daou, Shaykh Mufid (Oxford: Oneworld, 2005).
For the Ikhtisās see McDermott, The Theology of al-Shaikh al-Mufīd (d. 413/1022) (Beirut: Dar al-Machreq, 1978), 27, 34. Those who question al-Mufīd’s authorship of the Ikhti.sā.s include Abū l-Qāsim al-Khū’ī (d. 1413/1992) (see his Mu’jam rijāl al-hadith [n.p.: Markaz Nashr al-Thaqāfa al-Islāmiyya, 1992], 8:197), Hossein Modarressi, who refers to the work as “pseudo-Mufīd” (“Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur’an: A Brief Survey,” Studia Islamica 77 [1993]: 5–39, 18, note 75), and Hassan Ansari (“L’imamat et l’occultation selon l’imamisme: Étude bibliographique et histoire des textes,” PhD diss. [Paris: École Pratique des Hautes Études (Sorbonne), 2009], 109, note 521 and the studies cited there).
Mufīd (attrib.), al-Ikhtisās (Najaf: al-Matbaʿa al-Haydariyya, 1971), 101–104>Majlisī, 47:390–393, no. 114; referred to in Majlisī, 68:51. Al-Hasan b. Mutayyil al-Qummī was an authority of Ibn al-Walīd and the author of a Kitāb al-nawadir (Ardabīlī, 1: 220–221); Ibrāhīm b. Ishāq al-Nihāwandī al-Ahmarī was accused of extremism (fī madhhabihi rtifā ‘) (Ardabīlī, 1:18–19; Modarressi, Crisis and Consolidation in the Formative Period of Shi‘ite Islam [Princeton, NJ: Darwin Press, 1993], 23, note 30).
For whom see Encyclopedia Iranica, ed. Ehsan Yarshater (London: Routledge and Paul Kegan, 1982-), s.v. “Deylamī, Abū Mohammad” (E. Kohlberg).
Daylamī, Aʿlām al-dīn fī sifāt al-mu’minīn (Beirut: Mu’assasat Al al-Bayt li-Ihyā’ al-Turāth, 1988), 452–454>Majlisī, 27:123–125, no. 111. At Daylamī, 461, what is presumably the same work is cited under the title Mufarrij al-karb. The work is not mentioned in al-Tihrānī’s al-Dharī‘a ilā tasānīf al-shī‘a (Beirut: Dār al-Adwā’, 1983). It is unlikely to be the Faraj al-karb wa-farah al-qalb of al-Kafʿamī (for which see Tihrānī, 16:156, no. 423), since al-Kafʿamī lived a century after al-Daylamī.
Muhammad b. al-‘Abbās known as Ibn al-Juhām (alive in 328/939–940) is said to have devoted an entire work to this subject. This text (now lost) is entitled Ta’wīl mā nazala fī shī‘atihim (see Tūsī, Fihrist [Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Wafā’, 1983], 181, no. 652. Ibn al-Juhām’s best-known work is the Ta’wīl mā nazala min al-qur’ān al-karīm fī l-nabī wa-dlihi, of which extensive fragments survive; see Sayyārī [English], 35, 36 and index). For arguments used by Shīʿī authors to explain the absence of any explicit mention of the Shīʿa in the Qur’ān see Bar-Asher, Scripture, 88–93; Encyclopaedia of the Qur’ān, s.v. “Shiʿism and the Qur’ān” (Meir M. Bar-Asher), at 4:595–596.
See Kohlberg, “Taqiyya in Shīʿī Theology and Religion,” in Secrecy and Concealment: Studies in the History of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Religions, ed. Hans G. Kippenberg and Guy G. Stroumsa, 345–380 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995), 373–378.
Ibn Bābawayh, Maʿānī, 21, no. 2 (Saʿdān b. Muslim<Abū Basīr<al-Sādiq)>Katkānī, 1:53, no. 3, Majlisī, 2:16–17, no. 38, 92:375, no. 3, Huwayzī, 1:26, no. 5. Majlisī and Huwayzī have yabuththūn (“to propagate”) for yunbi’ūn. See also Qummī, 1:30. For mimmā ʿallamnāhum yabuththūn see further Tabrisī, Majma’, 1:83 (Muhammad b. Muslim<al-Sādiq). The understanding of rizq as knowledge (sustenance for the soul) was upheld by an anonymous scholar, who glossed mimma razaqnahum yunfiqūn as mimmā ʿallamnāhum yu‘allimūn. This gloss was quoted by Abū Nasr ‘Abd al-Rahīm b. ʿAbd al-Karīm al-Qushayrī (d. 514/1120), son of the renowned Sūfī Abū l-Qāsim al-Qushayrī (Qurtubī, al-Jāmiʿ li-ahkām al-qur’ān [Cairo: al-Hay’a al-Misriyya al-Amma li-l-Kitāb, 1987], 1:179).
For this work see Bar-Asher, “The Qurānic Commentary Ascribed to Imām Hasan al-ʿAskarī,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 24 (2000): 358–379.
Askarī (attrib.), Tafsīr (Qum: Madrasat al-Imām al-Mahdī, 1988), 67>Najafī, 33, no. 3, Majlisī, 2:64, no. 2.
Ibn al-Juhām>Najafī, 831, no. 3>Majlisī, 68:53, no. 95; Haskānī, Shawahid al-tanzīl li-qawāʿid al-tafdīl. ed. Muhammad Bāqir al-Mahmūdī (Beirut: Mu’assasat al-Aʿlamī li-l-Matbūʿāt, 1974), 2:356, no. 1125>Tabrisī, Majmaʿʿ 30:203. See further Ibn Shahrāshūb, 3:68>Majlisī, 38:8, no. 13. Yazīd is mentioned as an associate of Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya in Tabarī, Ta’rikh al-rusul wa-l-muluk. ed. M. J. de Goeje et al. (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1879–1901), second series, 674, 731.
For Kitāb Alī see Kohlberg, “Authoritative Scriptures in Early Imāmī Shīʿism,” in Les retours aux écritures: Fondamentalismes présents et passés, ed. Évelyne Patlagean and Alain Le Boulluec, 295–312 (Louvain-Paris: Peeters, 1993), 300–301;
Amir-Moezzi, Le guide divin dans le shīʿisme originel: Aux sources de l’ésotérisme en Islam (Paris-Lagrasse: Verdier, 1992), 187 = The Divine Guide in Early Shīʿism: The Sources of Esotericism in Islam, trans. David Streight (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994), 74; Modarressi, Tradition, 4–12.
Ibn Bābawayh, Man la yahduruhu l-faqīh, ed. Hasan al-Mūsawī al-Kharsān (Najaf: Dār al-Kutub al-Islāmiyya, 1957), 4:295, no. 892>Katkānī, 1:374–375, no. 4; Najafī, 141– 142, no. 22>Majlisī, 68:140, no. 82.
Ibn Bābawayh, Risālat al-i‘tiqādāt (Tehran: lithograph ed., 1899–1900), 94 (trans. Fyzee, A Shī‘ite Creed [London: Oxford University Press, 1942], 75–76)>Majlisī, 7:251, no. 9.
Tabrisī, Majma‘, 27:98>Fayd, 5:112, Majlisī, 7:81, Huwayzī, 5:195, no. 42. Cf. Qummī, 2:345>Fayd, 5:112, Majlisī, 6:246, no. 77, Huwayzī, 5:195, no. 41; Kulīnī, 3:242, no. 3, cited in Halevi, Muhammad’s Grave: Death Rites and the Making of Islamic Society (New York: Columbia University Press, 2007), 216. For the period between the moment of death and resurrection and the shifting interpretations of the term barzakh see Halevi, 197–233 and index.
Ibn Bābawayh, ‘Uyūn akhbār al-Ridā (Najaf: al-Matba‘a al-Haydariyya, 1970), 2:65 (‘Alī: fiyya nazalat)>Majlisī, 35:335, no. 14; Irbilī, 1:320>Majlisī, 35:332, no. 2.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2013 Michael Cook, Najam Haider, Intisar Rabb, and Asma Sayeed
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kohlberg, E. (2013). The Abū Baṣīr Tradition: Qur’ānic Verses on the Merits of the Shī‘a. In: Cook, M., Haider, N., Rabb, I., Sayeed, A. (eds) Law and Tradition in Classical Islamic Thought. Palgrave Series in Islamic Theology, Law, and History. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137078957_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137078957_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-29507-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-07895-7
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)