1

Zaidiyyah
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search "Zaidi" redirects here. For Zaidi (Last Name) and other uses, see Zaidi (disambiguation). Zaidiyya, Zaidism or Zaydism (Arabic: az-zaydiyya, adjective form Zaidi or Zaydi) is a Sh'a madhhab (sect, school) named after the Imm Zayd ibn Al. Followers of the Zaidi fiqh are called Zaidis (or occasionally, Fivers by Sunnis). There is also a group called the Zaidi Wasts who are Twelvers (see below). First Five Zaidi Imms Followers of the Zaidi fiqh recognize the first four of the Twelve Imams but they accept Zayd ibn Ali as their "Fifth Imm", instead of his brother Muhammad al-Baqir. After Zayd ibn Ali, the Zaidi recognize other descendants of Hasan ibn Ali or Husayn ibn Ali to be Imams. Other well known Zaidi imams in history were Yahya ibn Zayd, Muhammad al Nafs az-Zakiyah and Ibrahim ibn Abdullah. Muhammad Ali ibn Abu Talib Hasan ibn Ali Husayn ibn Ali Ali ibn Husayn (Zayn al Abidin) Zayd ibn Ali Law In matters of law or fiqh, the Zaidis follow Zaid ibn Ali's teachings which are documented in his book Majmu Al Fiqh (in Arabic: .) The Zaidis are similar to the Hanafi madhhab with elements of the Jafaari madhhab. (Citation Needed) Theology In matters of theology, the Zaidis are close to the Mu'tazili school, but they are not Mu'tazilite, since there are a few issues between both schools, most notably the Zaidi doctrine of the imamate imamah, that are rejected by Mu'tazilites. The Zaidi Sects [1]

Prophet of Islam 1st Imam 2nd Imam 3rd Imam 4th Imam 5th Imam

The Zaidi sect was started by the followers of Zaid bin 'Ali, his companions Abu'l Jarud Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad, Sulayman ibn Jarir, Kathir an-Nawa Al-Abtar and Hasan ibn Salih. The Zaidi sect then divided into six groups:

1. The earliest group called, Jarudiyya (named for Abu'l Jarud Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad), was opposed to the approval of certain companions of Muhammad. They held that there was sufficient description given by the Prophet so that all should have recognised Imam 'Ali. They therefore

2 consider the companions sinful in failing to recognise Imam 'Ali as the legitimate Caliph. They also deny legitimacy to Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman, they also denounce Talha, Zubair. This sect was active during the late Umayyad and early 'Abbasid period. Its views although predominant among the later Zaidis, became extinct in Iraq and Iran due to forced conversion to Ithna' Ashariyya by the Safawids. The second group, Sulaimaniyya (for Sulayman ibn Jarir), held that the Imamate should be a matter to be decided by consultation. They felt that the companions, including Abu Bakr and 'Umar, had been in error in failing to follow Imam 'Ali but it did not amount to sin. The third group is Tabiriyya, Butriyya or Salihiyya (for Kathir an-Nawa Al-Abtar and Hasan ibn Salih). They are virtually identical in belief with the Sulaimaniyya, however they include Uthman into the non-sin category of error. The fourth group is Dukayniyya Shia. They believed Muhammads followers fell into unbelief after his death because they did not uphold the Imamate of Ali, but instead accepted Abu Bakr as the first leader of the Muslim community after Muhammad. The fifth group is Khalafiyya Shia. They believed in a unique line of Imams after Zayd, starting with a man named Abd al-Samad and continuing with his descendants. The sixth group is Khashabiyya Shia. They believed that the Imamate must remain only among the descendents of Hasan and Husayn, even if that Imam is ignorant, immoral and tyrannical.

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

The Zaidis do not believe in the infallibility of the Imams, nor that the Imams receive divine guidance. Zaidis also do not believe that the Imamate must pass from father to son, but believe it can be held by any Sayyid descended from either Hasan ibn Ali or Husayn ibn Ali. It must be noted, however, that Shi'i Twelvers do not necessarily believe in Imamate passing from father to son either, as can be seen from the transition of Imamate from the second Imam, Hasan ibn Ali, after his death to his brother Husayn ibn Ali. Zaidis believe Zayd was the rightful successor to the Immate because he led a rebellion against the Umayyads, whom he believed were tyrannical and corrupt. Muhammad al-Baqir did not engage in political action and the followers of Zayd believed that a true Imm must fight against corrupt rulers.[citation needed] Zaidis also reject the notion of Occultation (ghayba) of the "Hidden Imm". Like the Ism'ls, they believe in a living Imm (or Imms).[citation needed] Great Sunni Imam Abu Hanifa has given a Fatwa (Legal verdict) in favor of Imam Zaid[citation needed] in his rebellion against Ummayid ruler of his time. Community and former States Since the earliest form of Zaidism was of the Jarudiyya group[1], many of the first Zaidi states, like those of the Alavids, Buyids, Ukhaidhirids[citation needed] and Rassids, were inclined to the Jarudiyya group. The Idrisids (Arabic: )were Arab [2] Zaydi Shia[3][4][5][6][7][8] dynasty in the western Maghreb ruling from 788 to 985, named after its first sultan, Idriss I. A Zaidi state was established in Daylaman and Tabaristan (northern Iran) in 864 C.E. by the Alavids[9]; it lasted until the death of its leader at the hand of the Samanids in 928 C.E. Roughly forty years later the state was revived in Gilan (north-western Iran) and survived under Hasanid leaders until 1126 C.E. After which from the 12th-13th centuries, the Zaidis of Daylaman, Gilan and Tabaristan then acknowledge the Zaidi Imams of Yemen or rival Zaidi Imams within Iran.[10] The Buyids were initially Zaidi[11] as well as the Ukhaidhirite rulers of al-Yamama in the 9th and 10th centuries.[12]

3 The leader of the Zaidi community took the title of Caliph. As such, the ruler of Yemen was known as the Caliph, al-Hadi Yahya bin al-Hussain bin al-Qasim ar-Rassi Rassids (a descendant of Imam al-Hasan) who, at Sa'da, in c. 893-7 C.E., founded the Zaidi Imamate and this system continued until the middle of the 20th century, until the revolution of 1962 C.E. that deposed the Zaidi Imam (see Imams of Yemen). The founding Zaidism of Yemen was of the Jarudiyya group[13], however with the increasing interaction with Hanafi and Shafi'i Sunni Islam, there was a shift from the Jarudiyya group to the Sulaimaniyya, Tabiriyya, Butriyya or Salihiyya groups. Currently, Zaidis constitute about 40-45% of the population in Yemen. Ja'faris and Isma'ilis are 2-5%.[2], [3] In Saudi Arabia, it is estimated that there are over 1 million Zaidis (primarily in the western provinces).[citation needed] Currently the most prominent Zaidi movement is Hussein al-Houthi's Shabab Al Mu'mineen who have been engaged in a uprising against the Yemeni Government in which the Army has lost 743 men and thousands of innocent civilians have been killed or displaced by Houthi and government forces causing a grave humanitarian crisis in north Yemen. Shia Population of the Middle East[14] References 1. ^ a b Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Momen, p.50, 51. and S.S. Akhtar Rizvi, "Shi'a Sects" 2. ^ Hodgson, Marshall (1961), Venture of Islam, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 262 3. ^ Ibn Ab Zar al-Fs, Al ibn Abd Allh (1340), Raw al-Qirs: Ans al-Murib bi-Rawd alQirs f Akhbr Mulk al-Maghrib wa-Trkh Madnat Fs, ar-Rab: Dr al-Manr (published 1972), pp. 38 4. ^ http://hespress.com/?browser=view&EgyxpID=5116, http://hespress.com/? browser=view&EgyxpID=5116 5. ^ Introduction to Islamic theology and law, By Ignc Goldziher, Bernard Lewis, pg.218 6. ^ Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Part 24, By James Hastings, pg.844 7. ^ The Idrisids 8. ^ Shi'ah tenets concerning the question of the imamate 9. ^ Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Iranian Influence on Moslem Literature 10.^ Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Encyclopedia Iranica 11.^ Walker, Paul Ernest (1999), written at London ; New York, Hamid Al-Din Al-Kirmani: Ismaili Thought in the Age of Al-Hakim, Ismaili Heritage Series, 3, I.B. Tauris in association with the Institute of Ismaili Studies., pp. 13, ISBN 1860643213 12.^ Madelung, W. "al-Ukhayir." Encyclopaedia of Islam. Edited by: P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Brill, 2007. Brill Online. 07 December 2007 [1] 13.^ Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) 14.^ The Gulf 2000 Project SIPA Columbia University

Zaydiyyah Doctrines Zaydiyyah is a Shi'ite school of law which, of all the groups in Shi'a, is

closest to the Sunni tradition. The Zaydis are principally distinguished from other Shi'ite groups in their conception of the nature of the Imamate. Unlike the Imamis and Isma'ilis, who believe that the Imamate is handed down through a particular line of descendants, the Zaydis believe that anyone in the house of Ali is eligible for the Imamate. The Zaydis reject the doctrine of the Hidden Imam and the return of the Mahdi. The Imam is regarded as neither infallible nor capable of performing miracles. Personal merit, rather than investiture, governs who should be made Imam. The Zaydis reject any form of 'sufi' tradition. Theologically they are closest to the Mu'tazila school. History The term "Zaydi" is applied to the followers of Zayd b. Ali, the grandson of al-Husayn (the son of the fourth caliph, Ali) and half-brother of the fifth Imam, Muhammad al-Baqir. Zaid b. Ali was killed in 740 in an uprising against the Ummayad Caliph al-Hisham. In the 9th century two Zaydi states were established: one in Tabaristan, a region south of the Caspian Sea, and the other in Yemen. The Zaydi state came to an end in 928 when its ruler, al-Hasan ibn al-Qasim, fell in battle. However, in 964 a second Zaydi Imamate was established; this lasted until the twelfth century. From the twelfth century the Zaydi communities declined in importance, and during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were gradually incorporated into the Twelver Shi'a. The Yemeni state of Zaydis was founded in 890 by Yahya ibn al-Husayn and has lasted up until the present day. In spite of internal fighting over succession and attacks from the Isma'ilis, the Yemeni state retained its independence until 1539 when it was conquered by the Ottoman Turks and became a province within the Ottoman empire. In 1595 the Yemen Zaydis declared war on the Turks, which finally led to the departure of the last Ottoman governor in 1635. The Yemen retained its independence until 1872 when once again it became a province within the Ottoman empire. De facto independence was achieved during the first world war and actual independence with the fall of the Ottoman empire after the first world war. Following the dissolution of the Ottoman empire Imam Yahya was left in control of the Yemen. In 1948 Imam Yahya was assassinated in an attempted palace coup. The coup was defeated by Yahya's son, Ahmad, who succeeded his father as Imam. When Imam Ahmad died in September 1962 he was succeeded by his son, Muhammad. A week later an army coup deposed the Imam established the Yemen Arab Republic. Since that time the Imamate has remained vacant. Symbols Adherents Zadiyyah does not have a distinctive symbol system. Zaydis are estimated to constitute 8 million of the some 70 million Shi'ite population of the world. (Yann Richard, Shi'ite Islam (Oxford University Press, 1995 )). Zaydiyyah has no headquarters or such. It is, however, the official school of the Yemen.

Headquarters/ Main Centre

Shi`ite sect named after Zayd b. Ali, grandson of Husayn.

5 The Zaydi sect was formed by the followers of Zayd b. Ali, who led an unsuccessful rebellion against the Umayyad caliph Hisham in 740. According to Zaydi political theory, Ali, Hasan and Husayn are the first three rightful Imams; after them, the imamate is open to whomever of their descendants establishes himself through armed rebellion. The first Zaydi state was established in Tabaristan (northern Iran) in 864; it lasted until the death of its leader at the hand of the Samanids in 928. Forty years later the state was revived in Gilan (north-western Iran) and survived under Hasanid leaders until the 12th century. In Yemen, a Zaydi state was established in 893 by a Hasanid who had originally been invited to mediate between quarrelling Yemeni tribes. A succession of occupations by foreign dynasties beginning in the tenth century occasionally forced the Zaydi imamate to retreat northwards; however, the imamate survived until the death of its last imam in 1962. Bibliography

The Encyclopaedia of Islam, second edition Religious Trends in Early Islamic Iran, Wilferd Madelung, Albany 1988 Shi`ism, Heinz Halm, Edinburgh 1991

ZAYD IBN ALI Zayd ibn Ali' (, also spelled 'Zaid') (695-740 C.E.) He was given the title "Zayd the Martyr" (''Zayd ash-Shahid'') by his sympathizers. He was the grandson of Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad. Zayd was born in Medina in 695. His father was Ali ibn Husayn, The fourth Shi'a Imam. His mother was a concubine of Indian origin. Main articles: Zaidi Revolt Zayd led a rebellion known as the Zaidi Revolt against the Umayyads in the middle of 8th century, renewing hostilities that existed between the Umayyads and the Hashemites. Zayd was killed during fighting in 740. After his death, some felt that he was the rightful successor to his father, rather than his half-brother Muhammad al-Baqir. Those who believe in this line of succession form the Zaidi sect within Shi'a Islam. Several works of hadith, theology, and Quranic exegesis are attributed to him. The Mu'tazilite school of theology is believed to have adopted many of Zayd's teachings, and therefore followers of the Zaidi sect are close to Mu'tazilite school of theology. Who was Zaid ibn 'Ali? [1] The Prophet prophesied his martyrdom, as narrated by Imam Hussain: "The Holy Prophet put his sacred hand on my back and said: 'O Hussain, it will not be long until a man will be born among your descendants. He will be called Zaid; he will be killed as a martyr. On the day of resurrection, he and his companions will enter heaven, setting their feet on the necks of the people.'" [2] Shaykh Mufid describes him as "a devout worshipper, pious, a jurist, God-fearing and brave." [3] It is worth mentioning that he is also the first narrator of the famous as-Sahifah as-Sajjdiyya of Imam Zainul 'Abidin. Historians of both Shi'is and Sunnis recorded that when Hisham ibn Abdu'l-Malik became the caliph, he committed many atrocities. With regard to the Bani Hashim, he was particularly cruel. At last, Zaid ibn Ali, well known as a great scholar and a pious theologian, went to see the caliph to seek redress for the grievances of the Bani Hashim. As soon as Zaid arrived, the caliph, instead of greeting him as a direct descendant of the prophet, abused him with such abominable language that it can not

6 be repeated. Because of this disgraceful treatment, Zaid left Syria for Kufa, where he raised an army against the Bani Umayyad. The governor of Kufa, Yusuf ibn 'Umar Thaqafi came out with a huge army to face him. Zaid recited the following war poem: "Disgraceful life and honourable death: both are bitter morsels, but if one of them must be chosen, my choice is honourable death." Although he fought bravely, Zaid was killed in battle on the 2nd of Safar in 120 A.H. at the age of forty-two by Yusuf ibn 'Amr ath-Thaqafi (the Umayyad governor). His son, Yahya, took his body from the field and buried him away from the city near the river bank, causing the water to flow over it. However, the grave was discovered and, under Yusuf's orders, the body was exhumed, Zaid's head was cut off and sent to Hisham in Syria. In the month of Safar, 121 A.H., Hisham had the sacred body of this descendant of the Prophet placed on the gallows entirely naked. For four years the sacred body remained on the gallows. Thereafter, when Walid Ibn Yazid ibn Abdu'l-Malik ibn Marwan became caliph in 126 A.H., he ordered that the skeleton be taken down from the gallows, burnt, and the ashes scattered to the wind. This accursed man committed a similar atrocity to the body of Yahya ibn Zaid of Gurgan. This noble man also opposed the oppression of the Bani Umayyad. He too was martyred on the battlefield. His head was sent to Syria and, as in the case of his revered father, his body was hung on the gallows - for six years. Friend and foe alike wept at the sight. Waliu'd-din Abu Muslim Khorasani, who had risen against the Bani Umayyad on behalf of Bani 'Abbas, took his body down and buried it in Gurgan, where it is a place of pilgrimage. [4] Due to the fact that Zaid ibn 'Ali led a rebellion via Jihad against the Umayyad Caliphate, certain Shiites were under the impression that Zaid was claiming imamate for himself and therefore started believing in him as the Imam. This is what developped into the Zaidi sect of Shi'a Islam by his 'sahabah', companions. The Ithna 'Ashari sources do not believe that Zaid claimed imamate for himself. Shaykh Mufid states "However that was not his intention because he knew of the right of his brother, peace be on him, to the Imamate before him, and of his bequest of trusteeship (wasiyya) at his death to Abu 'Abd Allh (i.e., Jafar as-Sadiq), peace be on him." [5] There is no evidence in the relationship between Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and Zaid ibn Ali that would demonstrate that Zaid ibn Ali was claiming the Imamate for himself. When Imam Jafar as-Sadiq was informed about Zaid ibn Ali's martyrdom, "he was very sad...and he set apart a thousand dinars of his own money for the families of those of (Zaid's) followers who were killed with him." [6] 'Allamah Tabtab'i's statement that Zaid himself "considered the first two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, as their Imams." is rejected by the Ithna 'Ashari 'Ulema.[7] There are two shrines for Zaid, One is in Kufa, Iraq, the other is in Karak, Jordan. The shrine in Jordan may be the final resting place for the head of Zaid ibn Ali ibn Al-Hussain. He was the great, great, grandson of Prophet Mohammad and a religious leader known for his righteous, majestic and knowledgeable ways. When descriibng Zaid, Imam Jafar As-Sadiq said: "Among us he was the best read in the Holy Qur'an, and the most knowledgeable about religion, and the most caring towards family and relatives."[8] 1. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) 2. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Peshawar Nights by Sultanu'l-Wa'izin Shirazi 3. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: al-Irshad, p. 403 4. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: al-Mufid, al-Irshad, p. 404; al-Mas'udi, Muruj adh-Dhahab; al-Qummi, Muntahal Aml, p. 36 5. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: al-Irshad, p. 404

7 6. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: al-Irshad, p. 405) For other such narrations by Shaykh as-Saduq, see Muntahal Aml, p. 36 7. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Shi'a Islam, p. 77 and S.S. Akhtar Rizvi, "Shi'a Sects" 8. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: | Religion & Faith ZAYDI REVOLT

The 'Zaidi Revolt' was a failed rebellion led by Zayd ibn Ali in 740 against the Umayyad dynasty, who had taken over the Islamic Caliphate since the death of his great-grandfather, Ali. Unlike his brother, Muhammad al-Baqir, the fifth Imam of the Twelver Shi'as, Zayd believed the time was ripe for renewing the rebellion against the Umayyad Caliphs in support of the claims of his own Hashemite clan. It is here where many parallels with the life of his more famous grandfather, Husayn, begin. Zayd began seeking followers for his revolt, and found support among the people of Kufa in Iraq. Kufa had previously been the capital of his great-grandfather Ali, and the place where his grandfather Husayn also sought support for his own rebellion in 680. Zayd moved to Kufa and spent more than a year among the Arab tribes in the region, gathering further support. The Umayyad governor of Kufa, however, learned of the plot, and commanded the people to gather at the great mosque, locked them inside and began a search for Zayd. Zayd with some troops fought his way to the mosque and called on people to come out. However, in events that echoed Husayn's own abandonment by the Kufans decades earlier, the bulk of Zayd's supporters deserted him and joined the Umayyads, leaving Zayd with only a few dozen outnumbered followers. Accounts differ slightly on the circumstances of the desertion. Sunni sources attribute the desertion to Zayd's refusal to speak ill of the first two Caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, who most Shi'a regard as usurpers. Zaydi sources on the other hand attribute it to Zayd's refusal to acknowledge the authority of his nephew, Ja'far al-Sadiq (the sixth Imam according to the Twelver Shi'ites). In both accounts, Zayd bitterly scolds the "rejectors" (''Rafidha'') who desert him, an apellation used by some Sunnis to describe non-Zaydi Shi'ites to this day. Nevertheless, Zayd fought on. His small band of followers was soundly defeated by the much larger Umayyad force, and Zayd fell in battle to an arrow that pierced his forehead. The arrow's removal led to his death. He was buried in secret outside Kufa, but the Umayyads were able to find the burial place, and, in retribution for the rebellion, exhumed Zayd's body and crucified it. They then set it on fire and scattered the ashes, probably in order to prevent his gravesite from becoming an object of pilgrimage. When the Abbasids, who, like Zayd, were Hashemites, overthrew the Umayyads in 750, they in turn exhumed Hisham's body, crucified it, and burned it, out of revenge for Zayd. Zayd's desperate rebellion became the inspiration for the Zaydi sect, a school of Shi'a Islam that holds that any learned descendant of Ali can become an Imam by asserting and fighting for his claim as Zayd did (the rest of the Shi'as believe, in contrast, that the Imam must be divinely appointed). However, all schools of Islam, including the majority Sunnis, regard Zayd as a righteous martyr (''shahid'') against what is regarded as the corrupt leadership of the Umayyads. It is even reported that Abu Hanifa, founder of the largest school of Sunni jurisprudence, gave financial support to Zayd's revolt and called on others to join Zayd's rebellion. Zayd's rebellion inspired other revolts by members of his clan, especially in the Hejaz, the most famous among these being the revolt of Muhammad al-Nafs az-Zakiyya against the Abbasids in 762

The Zaidi Sects [1] The Zaidi sect was started by the Sahaba of Zaid bin 'Ali, his companions Abu'l Jarud Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad, Sulayman ibn Jarir, Kathir an-Nawa Al-Abtar and Hasan ibn Salih. The Zaidi sect then divided into three groups: #The earliest group called 'Jarudiyya' (named for ''Abu'l Jarud Ziyad ibn Abi Ziyad''), was opposed to the approval of certain companions of Muhammad of Abu Bakr. They held that there was sufficient description given by the Prophet so that all should have recognised Imam 'Ali. They therefore consider the companions sinful in failing to recognise Imam 'Ali. They also denied legitimacy to Abu Bakr, 'Umar and 'Uthman, they also denounce Talha, Zubair, and Aisha. This sect was active during the late Umayyad and early 'Abbasid period. Its views although predominant among the later Zaidis, became extinct due to similarities with the Ithna 'Ashari sect. #The second group, 'Sulaimaniyya' (for ''Sulayman ibn Jarir''), held that the Imamate should be a matter to be decided by consultation. They felt that the companions, including Abu Bakr and 'Umar, had been in error in failing to follow Imam 'Ali but did not amount to sin. Talha, Zubair, and Aisha became disbelievers. #The third group is 'Tabiriyya', 'Butriyya' or 'Salihiyya' (for ''Kathir an-Nawa Al-Abtar'' and ''Hasan ibn Salih''). They are virtually identical in belief with the Sulaimaniyya, differing only in that that the Tabiriyya do not revile 'Uthman. Zaidi beliefs are moderate compared to other Shi'i sects. The Zaidis do not believe in the infallibility of the Imams, nor that they receive divine guidance. Zaidis also do not believe that the Imamate must pass from father to son, but believe it can be held by any Sayyid descended from both Hasan ibn Ali or Husayn ibn Ali . Zaidis believe Zayd was the rightful successor to the Immate because he led a rebellion against the Umayyads, whom he believed were tyrannical and corrupt. Muhammad al-Baqir did not engage in political action and the followers of Zayd believed that a true Imm must fight against corrupt rulers. Zaidis also reject the notion of Occultation (''ghayba'') of the "Hidden Imm". Like the Ism'ls, they believe in a living Imm (or Imms). Community Since the earliest form of Zaidism was of the Jarudiyya group[1], many of the first Zaidi states like those of the Alavids, Buyids, Ukhaidhirids and Rassids (established Zaidism in Yemen) were inclined to the Jarudiyya group. The first Zaidi state was established in Daylaman and Tabaristan (northern Iran) in 864 C.E. by the Alavids[3]; it lasted until the death of its leader at the hand of the Samanids in 928 C.E. Roughly forty years later the state was revived in Gilan (north-western Iran) and survived under Hasanid leaders until 1126 C.E. After which from the 12th-13th centuries, the Zaidis of Daylaman, Gilan and Tabaristan then acknowledge the Zaidi Imams of Yemen or rival Zaidi Imams within Iran.[4] The Buyids were reported to have been Zaidi, as well as the Ukhaidhirite rulers of Najd in the 9th and 10th centuries. The leader of the Zaidi community took the title of Caliph. As such, the ruler of Yemen was known as the Caliph, al-Hadi Yahya bin al-Hussain bin al-Qasim ar-Rassi (a descendant of Imam al-Hasan) who, at Sa'da, in 893-7 C.E., founded the Zaidi Imamate and this system continued until the middle of the 20th century, until the revolution of 1962 C.E. that deposed the Zaidi Imam. The founding Zaidism of Yemen was of the Jarudiyya group, however with the increasing interaction with Hanafi and Shafi'i Sunni Islam, there was a shift from the Jarudiyya group to the Sulaimaniyya, Tabiriyya, Butriyya or Salihiyya groups.

9
[5]

Zaidis form the dominant religious group in Yemen. Currently, they constitute about 40-45% of the population in Yemen. Whilst Ja'faris and Isma'ilis are 2-5%.[1],[2] In Saudia Arabia, it is estimated that there are over 1 million Zaidis (primarily in the western provinces) and 3-4 million Jafaris (primarily in the eastern provinces).[3] Currently the most prominent Zaidi movement is Hussein al-Houthi's Shabab Al Mu'mineen who have been the subject of an ongoing campaign against them by the Yemeni Government in which the Army has lost 743 men and thousands of innocent civilians have been killed or displaced by government forces causing a grave humanitarian crisis in north Yemen. Shia Population of the Middle East[6] Al-Zaidi (Az-Zaidi) People with the last name Al-Zaidi (Az-Zaidi) are Sayyid, Arab descendents of Zayd bin Ali that either stayed in Kufa, Iraq or returned to Al-Hijaz and migrated to Al-Asir and Northern Yemen. They are predominantly Twelvers but some are of the Zaidi fiqh [5] Zaidi Wasitis Some Zaidis are known as ''Wasitis''. Zayd ibn Ali was martyred in Kufa, Iraq, many of his descendents either returned to al-Hijaz or remained in Iraq. Some of those who stayed in Iraq settled in Wasit. Some descendants from Wasit then moved to the Indian subcontinent. These Zaidis believe in twelve Imams and are part of the Shia Ithna Asharia. Most of them settled in India and Pakistan. [5] The biggest group of Zaidis believing in twelve Shia Imams is known as ''Saadat-e-Bara''. ''Saadat'' means descendant of the Prophet Muhammad and ''Bara'' means twelve in Hindi and Urdu. Saadat-e-Bara's numbers are highest in Karachi (Pakistan) and Muzaffarnagar (India). Literature

Cornelis van Arendonk : ''Les dbuts de l'imamat zaidite au Yemen'' , Leyde , Brill 1960

References

1. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Momen, p.50, 51. and S.S. Akhtar Rizvi, "Shi'a Sects" 2. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Momen, p.50, 51. and S.S. Akhtar Rizvi, "Shi'a Sects" 3. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing: Iranian Influence on Moslem Literature 4. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Referencing:

10 Encyclopedia Iranica 5. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) 6. The Gulf 2000 Project SIPA Columbia University 7. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) 8. Article by Sayyid 'Ali ibn 'Ali Al-Zaidi, A short History of the Yemenite Shiites (2005) Husayn Tabatabaion Sects of Shias Ch.2 DIVISIONS WITHIN SHI'ISM Each religion possesses a certain number of primary principles which form its essential basis and other principles of secondary importance. When the followers of a religion differ as to the nature of the primary principles and their secondary aspects but preserve a common basis, the result is called division (inshi'ab) within that religion. Such divisions exist in all traditions and religions, and more particularly in the four "revealed" religions of Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism, and Islam. Shi'ism did not undergo any divisions during the imamate of the first three Imams: Ali, Hasan, and Husayn. But after the martyrdom of Husayn, the majority of the Shi'ites accepted the imamate of Ali ibn Husayn al-Sajjad, while a minority known as the Kisaniyah believed that the third son of Ali, Muhammad ibn Hanafiyah, was the fourth Imam as well as the promised Mahdi, and that he had gone into occultation in the Radwa mountains and one day would reappear. After the death of Imam al-Sajjad the majority of the Shi'ites accepted as Imam his son, Muhammad al-Baqir, while a minority followed Zayd al-Shahid, another son of Imam al-Sajjad, and became known as Zaydis. Following Imam Muhammad al-Baqir, the Shi'ites accepted his son Ja'far al-Sadiq as Imam and after the death of Imam Ja'far the majority followed his son Imam Musa al-Kazim as the seventh Imam. However, one group followed the older son of the sixth Imam, Isma'il, who had died while his father was still alive, and when this latter group separated from the majority of Shi'ites it became known as Isma'ilis. Others accepted as Imam either 'Abdollah alAftah or Muhammad, both sons of the sixth Imam. Finally, another party stopped with the sixth Imam himself and considered him as the last Imam. In the same way, after the martyrdom of Imam Musa alKazim the majority followed his son, Ali al-Rida, as the eight Imam. However, some stopped with the seventh Imam and became known as the Waqifiyah. From the eighth Imam to the twelfth, whom the majority of the Shi'ites believe to be the promised Mahdi, no division of any importance took place within Shi'ism. Even if certain events occurred in the form of division, they lasted but a few days and dissolved by themselves. For example, Ja'far, the son of the tenth Imam, claimed to be Imam after the death of his brother, the eleventh Imam. A group of people followed him but scattered in a few days and Ja'far himself did not follow his claim any further. Further more, there are differences between Shi'ites in theological and juridical matters which must not be considered as division in religious schools. Also the Babi and Baha'i sects, which like the Batinis (the Qaramitah) differ in both the principles (usul) and branches (furu') of Islam from the Muslims, should in any sense be considered as branches of Shi'ism. The sects which separated from the majority of Shi'ites all dissolved within a short period, except two: the Zaydi and the Isma'ili which continue to exist until now. To this day communities of these branches are active in various parts of the world such as the Yemen, India, and Syria. Therefore, we shall limit our discussion to these two branches along with the majority of Shi'ites who are Twelvers.

11 Zaydism and Its Branches The Zaydis are the followers of Zayd al-Shahid, the son of Imam al-Sajjad. Zayd rebelled in 12 1/737 against the Umayyad caliph Hisham 'Abd al-Malik and a group paid allegiance to him. A battle ensued in Kufa between Zayd and the army of the caliph in which Zayd was killed. The followers of Zayd regard him as the fifth Imam of the Household of the Prophet. After him his son, Yahya ibn Zayd, who rebelled against the caliph Walid ibn Yazid and was also killed, took his place. After Yahya, Muhammad ibn 'Abdallah and Ibrahim ibn 'Abdallah, who revolted against the Abbasid caliph Mansur al-Dawaniqi and were also killed, were chosen as Imams. Henceforth for some time there was disorder in Zaydi ranks until Nasir al-Utrush, a descendant of the brother of Zayd, arose in Khurasan. Being pursued by the governmental authorities in that region, he fled to Mazandaran, becoming himself Imam. For some time his descendants continued to rule as Imams in that area. According to Zaydi belief any descendant of Fatimah (the daughter of the Prophet) who begins an uprising in the name of defending the truth may become Imam if he is learned in the religious sciences, ethically pure, courageous and generous. Yet for some time after Utrush and his descendants there was no Imam who could bring about an insurrection with the sword until recently when, about sixty years ago, Imam Yahya revolted in the Yemen, which had been part of the Ottoman Empire, made it independent, and began to rule there as Imam. His descendants continued to rule in that region as Imams until very recently. At the beginning the Zaydis, like Zayd himself, considered the first two caliphs, Abu Bakr and Umar, as their Imams. But after a while some of them began to delete the name of the first two caliphs from the list of Imams and placed Ali as the first Imam. From what is known of Zaydi beliefs it can be said that in the principles of Islam (usul) they follow a path close to that of the Mu'tazilites, while in the branches or derivative institutions of the law (furu') they apply the jurisprudence of Abu Hanifah, the founder of one of the four Sunni schools of law. They also differ among themselves concerning certain problems. Isma'ilism and Its Branches Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq had a son named Isma'il who was the oldest of his children. Isma'il died during the lifetime of his father who summoned witnesses to his death, including the governor of Medina. Concerning this question , some believed that Isma'il did not die but went into occultation, that he would appear again and would be the promised Mahdi. They further believed that the summoning of witnesses on the part of the Imam for Isma'il's death was a way of hiding the truth in fear of al-Mansur, the Abbasid caliph. Another group believed that the true Imam was Isma'il whose death meant the imamate was transferred to his son Muhammad. A third group also held that although he died during the lifetime of his father he was the Imam and that the imamate passed after him to Muhammad ibn Isma'il and his descendants. The first two groups soon became extinct, while the third branch continues to exist to this day and has undergone a certain amount of division.

12 The Isma'ilis have a philosophy in many ways similar to that of the Sabaeans (star worshippers) combined with elements of Hindu gnosis. In the sciences and decrees of Islam they believe that each exterior reality (zahir) has an inner aspect (batin) and each element of revelation (tanzil) a hermeneutic and esoteric exegesis (ta'wil). The Isma'ilis believe that the earth can never exist without Proof (hujjah) of God. The Proof is two kinds: "speaker" (natiq) and "silent one" (samit). The speaker is a prophet and the silent one is an Imam or Guardian (wali) who is the inheritor, or executor of the testament (wasi) of a prophet. In any case the Proof of God is the perfect theophany of the Divinity. The principle of the Proof of God revolves constantly around the number seven. A prophet (nabi), who is sent by God, has the function of prophecy (nubuwwat), of bringing a Divine Law or Shari'ah. A prophet, who is the perfect manifestation of God, has the esoteric power of initiating men into the divine Mysteries (walayat). After him there are seven executors of his testament (wasayat) and the power of esoteric initiation into the Divine Mysteries (walayat). The seventh in the succession possesses those two powers and also the additional power of prophecy (nubuwwat). The cycle of seven executors (wasis) is then repeated with the seventh a prophet. The Isma'ilis say that Adam was sent as a prophet with the power of prophecy and of esoteric guidance and he had seven executors of whom the seventh was Noah, who had the three functions of nubuwwat, wasayat, and walayat. Abraham was the seventh executor (wasi) of Noah, Moses the seventh executor of Abraham, Jesus the seventh executor of Moses, Muhammad the seventh executor of Jesus, and Muhammad ibn Isma'il the seventh executor of Muhammad. They consider the wasis of the Prophet to be: Ali, Husayn ibn Ali (they do not consider Imam Hasan among the Imams), Ali ibn Husayn al-Sajjad, Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja'far al-Sadiq, Isma'il ibn Ja'far, and Muhammad ibn Isma'il. After this series there are seven descendants of Muhammad ibn Isma'il whose names are hidden and secret. After them there are the first seven rulers of the Fatimid caliphate of Egypt the first of whom, 'Ubaydallah al-Mahdi, was the founder of the Fatimid dynasty. The Isma'ilis also believe that in addition to the Proof of God there are always present on earth twelve "chiefs" (naqib) who are the companions and elite followers of the Proof. Some of the branches of the Batinis, however, like the Druzes, believe six of the "chiefs" to be from the Imams and six from others.

The Batinis In the year 278/89 1, a few years before the appearance of Ubaydallah al-Mahdi in North Africa, there appeared in Kufa an unknown person from Khuzistan (in southern Persia) who never revealed his name and identity. He would fast during the day and worship at night and made a living from his own labor. In addition he invited people to join the Isma'ili cause and was able to assemble a large number of people about him. From among them he chose twelve "chiefs" (naqib) and then he set out for Damascus. Having left Kufa he was never heard of again.

13 This unknown man was replaced by Ahmad, known as the Qaramite, who began to propagate Batini teachings in Iraq. As the historians have recorded, he instituted two daily prayers in place of the five of Islam, removed the necessity of ablution after sexual intercourse, and made the drinking of wine permissible. Contemporary with these events, other Batini leaders rose to invite people to join their cause and assembled a group of followers. The Batinis had no respect for the lives and possessions of those who were outside their group. For this reason they began uprisings in the cities of Iraq, Bahrain, the Yemen, and Syria, spilling the blood of people and looting their wealth. Many times they stopped the caravans of those who were making the pilgrimage to Mecca, killing tens of thousands of pilgrims and plundering their provisions and camels. Abu Tahir al-Qaramati, one of the Qaramite leaders who in 311/923 had conquered Basra and did not neglect to kill and plunder, set out with a large number of Batinis for Mecca in 317/929. After overcoming the brief resistance of government troops he entered the city and massacred the population as well as the newly arrived pilgrims. Even within the Masjid al-haram (the mosque containing the Ka'bah) and within the Holy Ka'bah itself, there flowed streams of blood. He divided the covering of the Ka'bah between his disciples. He tore away the door of the Ka'bah and took the black stone from its place back to the Yemen. For twenty-two years the black stone was in Qaramite hands. As a result of these actions the majority of Muslims turned completely away from the Batinis and considered them outside the pale of Islam. Even 'Ubaydallah al-Mahdi, the Fatimid ruler, who had risen in those days in North Africa and considered himself the promised Mahdi, abhorred them. According to the view of historians the distinguishing characteristic of the Batini school is that it interprets the external aspects of Islam in an esoteric manner and considers the externals of the Shari'ah to be only for simple-minded people of little intelligence who are deprived of spiritual perfection. Yet occasionally the Batini Imams did order certain regulations and laws to be practiced and followed.

The Nizaris, Musta'lis, Druzes and Muqanna'ah The Nizaris. Ubaydallah al-Mahdi, who rose in North Africa in 292/904 and as an Isma'ili declared his imamate and established Fatimid rule, is the founder of the dynasty whose descendants made Cairo the center of their caliphate. For seven generations this sultanate and Isma'ili imamate continued without any divisions. At the death of the seventh Imam, al-Mustansir bi'llah Mu'idd ibn Ali, his sons, Nizar and alMusta'li, began to dispute over the caliphate and imamate. After long disputes and bloody battle alMusta'li was victorious. He captured his brother Nizar and placed him in prison, where he died. Following this dispute those who accepted the Fatimids divided into two groups: the Nizaris and the Musta'lis. The Nizaris are the followers of Hasan al-Sabbah, who was one of the close associates of alMustansir. After Nizar's death, because of his support of Nizar, Hasan al-Sabbah was expelled from Egypt by al-Musta'li. He came to Persia and after a short while appeared in the Fort of Alamut near Qazwin. He

14 conquered Alamut and several surrounding forts. There he established his rule and also began to invite people to the Isma'ili cause. After the death of Hasan in 518/1124 Buzurg Umid Rudbari and after him his son, Kiya Muhammad, continued to rule following the methods and ways of Hasan al-Sabbah. After Kiya Muhammad, his son Hasan 'AlaDhikrihi'l-Salam, the fourth ruler of Alamut, changed the ways of Hasan al-Sabbah, who had been Nizari, and became Batini. Henceforth the Isma'ili forts continued as Batini. Four other rulers, Muhammad ibn Ala Dhikruhi'l-Salam, Jala al-Din Hasan, 'Ala' al-Din, and Rukn al-Din Khurshah, became Sultan and Imam one after another until Hulagu, the Mongol conqueror, invaded Persia. He captured Isma'ili forts and put all the Isma'ilis to death, leveling their forts to the ground. Centuries later, in 1255/1 839, the Aqa Khan of Mahalat in Persia, who belonged to the Nizaris, rebelled against Muhammad Shah Qajar in Kerman, but he was defeated and fled to Bombay. There he propagated his Batini-Nizari cause which continues to this day. The Nizaris are today called the Aqa Khanids. The Musta'lis. The Musta'lis were the followers of al-Musta'li. Their imamate continued during Fatimid rule in Egypt until it was brought to an end in the year 567/1171. Shortly thereafter, the Bohra sect, following the same school, appeared in India and survives to this day. The Druzes. The Druzes, who live in the Druze mountains in Syria (and also in Lebanon), were originally followers of the Fatimid caliphs. But as a result of the missionary activity of Nashtakin, the Druzes joined the Batini sect. The Druzes stop with the sixth Fatimid caliph al-Hakim bi'llah, whom others believe to have been killed, and claim that he is in occultation. He has ascended to heaven and will appear once again to the world. The Muqanna 'ah. The Muqanna'ah were at first disciples of 'Ata' al-Marwi known as Muqanna', who according to historical sources was a follower of Abu Muslim of Khurasan. After the death of Abu Muslim, Muqanna' claimed that Abu Muslim's soul had become incarnated in him. Soon he claimed to be a prophet and later a divinity. Finally, in the year 162/777 he was surrounded in the fort of Kabash in Transoxiana. When he became certain that he would be captured and killed, he threw himself into a fire along with some of his disciples and burned to death. His followers soon adopted Isma'ilism and the ways of the Batinis.

Diferences Between Twelve-Imam Shi'ism and Isma 'ilism and Zaydism The majority of the Shi'ites, from whom the previously mentioned groups have branched out, are TwelveImam Shi'ites, also called the Imamites. As has already been mentioned, the Shi'ites came into being because of criticism and protest concerning two basic problems of Islam, without having any objections to the religious ways which through the instructions of the Prophet had become prevalent among their

15 contemporary Muslims. These two problems concerned Islamic government and authority in the religious sciences, both of which the Shi'ites considered to be the particular right of the Household of the Prophet. The Shi'ites asserted that the Islamic caliphate, of which esoteric guidance and spiritual leadership are inseparable elements, belongs to Ali and his descendants. They also believed that according to the specification of the Prophet the Imams of the Household of the Prophet are twelve in number. Shi'ism held, moreover, that the external teachings of the Quran, which are the injunctions and regulations of the Shari'ah and include the principles of a complete spiritual life, are valid and applicable for everyone at all times, and are not to be abrogated until the Day of Judgment. These injunctions and regulations must be learned through the guidance of the Household of the Prophet. From a consideration of these points it becomes clear that the difference between Twelve-Imam Shi'ism and Zaydism is that the Zaydis usually do not consider the imamate to belong solely to the Household of the Prophet and do not limit the number of Imams to twelve. Also they do not follow the jurisprudence of the Household of the Prophet as do the Twelve-Imam Shi'ites. The difference between the Twelve-Imam Shi'ism and Isma'ilism lies in that for the latter the imamate revolves around the number seven and prophecy does not terminate with the Holy Prophet Muhammad. Also for them, change and transformation in the injunctions of the Shari'ah are admissible, as is even rejection of the duty of following Shari'ah, especially among the Batinis. In contrast, the Twelve-Imam Shi'ites consider the Prophet to be the "seal of prophecy" and believe him to have twelve successors and executors of his will. They hold the external aspect of the Shari'ah to be valid and impossible to abrogate. They affirm that the Quran has both an exoteric and an esoteric aspect. Summary of the History of Twelve-Imam Shi'ism As has become clear form the previous pages, the majority of Shi'ites are Twelvers. They were originally the same group of friends and supporters of Ali who, after the death of the Prophet, in order to defend the right of the Household of the Prophet in the question of the caliphate and religious authority, began to criticize and protest against prevalent views and separated from the majority of the people. During the caliphate of the "rightly-guided caliphs" (11/632-35/656) the Shi'ites were under a certain amount of pressure which became much greater during the Umayyad Caliphate (40/661 - 132/750) when they were no longer protected in any way against destruction of their lives and property. Yet the greater the pressure placed upon them, the firmer they became in their belief. They especially benefited from their being oppressed in spreading their beliefs and teachings. From the middle of the 2nd/8th century when the Abbasid caliphs established their dynasty, Shi'ism was able to gain a mew life as a result of the languid and weak state prevailing at that time. Soon, however, conditions became difficult once again and until the end of the 3rd/9th century became ever more stringent. At the beginning of the 4th/10th century, with the rise of the influential Buyids, who were Shi'ites, Shi'ism gained power and became more or less free to carry out its activities. It began to carry out scientific and scholarly debates and continued in this manner until the end of the 5th/11th century. At the beginning of the 7th/13th century when the Mongol invasion began, as a result of the general involvement in war and

16 chaos and the continuation of the Crusades, the different Islamic governments did not put too great a pressure upon the Shi'ites. Moreover, the conversion to Shi'ism of some Mongol rulers in Persia and the rule of the Sadat-i Mar'ashi (who were Shi'ites) in Mazandaran were instrumental in the spread of the power and territory of Shi'ism. They made the presence of large concentrations of Shi'ite population in Persia and other Muslim lands felt more than ever before. This situation continued through the 9th/15th century. At the beginning of the 10th/16th century, as a result of the rise of the Safavids, Shi'ism became the official religion of the vast territories of Persia and continues in this position to the present day. In other regions of the world also there are tens of millions of Shi'ites.

Ibne Khuldun on Sects of Shiah 5. Shi'ah tenets concerning the question of the imamate. Ref: http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/ik/Muqaddimah/Chapter3/Ch_3_25.htm It should be known that, linguistically, Shi'ah means "companions and followers." In the customary usage of old and modern jurists and speculative theologians, the word is used for the followers and descendants of 'All. The tenet on which they all agree is that the imamate is not a general (public) interest to be delegated to the Muslim nation for consideration and appointment of a person to fill it. (To the Shi'ah,) it is a pillar and fundamental article of Islam. No prophet 247 is permitted to neglect it or to delegate (the appointment of an imam) to the Muslim nation. It is incumbent upon him to appoint an imam for the (Muslims). The imam cannot commit 248 sins either great or small. 'Ali is the one whom Muhammad appointed. The (Shi'ah) transmit texts (of traditions) in support of (this belief), which they interpret so as to suit their tenets. The authorities on the Sunnah and the transmitters of the religious law do not know these texts. Most of them are supposititious, or some of their transmitters are suspect, or their (true) interpretation is very different from the wicked interpretation that (the Shi'ah) give to them. According to (the Shi'ah), these texts fall into the two categories of express and implied statements.249 An express statement, for instance, is the following statement (by Muhammad): "Ali is master of those whose master I am." 250 As they say, such a position of master (mentioned in the tradition) applies only to 'Ali. 'Umar thus said to him: "You have become the master of all believers, men and women."

17 Another tradition of this sort is the following statement of (Muhammad): "Your best judge is 'Ali." Imamate means exclusively the activity of judging in accordance with the divine laws. (The activity of) judging and being a judge is (what is) meant by "the people in authority" whom God requires us to obey in the verse of the Qur'an: "Obey God, and obey the Messenger and the people in authority among you." 251 Therefore, 'All and no other was arbitrator in the question of the imamate on the day of the Saqifah.252 Another statement of this sort is the following statement by (Muhammad): "He who renders the oath of allegiance to me upon his life is my legatee and the man who will be in charge of this authority here after me."Only 'Ali rendered the oath of allegiance to him (in this manner). An implied (argument), according to the Shi'ah, is the fact that the Prophet sent 'All to recite the surat al-Bara'ah 253 at the festival (in Mecca) when it had (just) been revealed. He first sent Abu Bakr with it. Then it was revealed to Muhammad that "a man from you,"-or: ". . . from your people"-"should transmit it." Therefore, he sent 'Ali to transmit it. As they say, this proves that 'Ali was preferred (by Muhammad). Furthermore, it is not known that Muhammad ever preferred anyone to 'All, while he preferred Usamah b. Zayd 254 and 'Amr b. al-' As 255 to both Abu Bakr and 'Umar during two different raids. According to (the Shi'ah), all these things prove that 'Ali and no one else was appointed (by Muhammad) to the caliphate. However, some of the statements quoted are little known, and others require an interpretation very different from that which (the Shi'ah) give. Some (Shi'ah) hold the opinion that these texts prove both the personal appointment of 'All and the fact that the imamate is transmitted from him to his successors. They are the Imamiyah. They renounce the two shaykhs (Abu Bakr and 'Umar), because they did not give precedence to 'Ali and did not render the oath of allegiance to him, as required by the texts quoted. The Imamiyah do not take the imamates (of Abu Bakr and 'Umar) seriously. But we do not want to bother with transmitting the slanderous things said about (Abfi Bakr and 'Umar) by (Imamiyah) extremists. They are objectionable in our opinion and (should be) in theirs. Other (Shi'ah) say that these proofs require the appointment of 'All not in person but as far as (his) qualities are concerned. They say that people commit an error when they do not give the qualities their proper place. They are the Zaydiyah. They do not renounce the two shaykhs (Abu Bakr and 'Umar). They do take their imamates seriously, but they say that 'All was superior to them. They permit an inferior person to be the imam, even though a superior person may be alive (at the same time).256 The Shi'ah 257 differ in opinion concerning the succession to the caliphate after 'Ali. Some have it passed on among the descendants of Fatimah in succession, through testamentary determination (nass). We shall mention that later on. They (who believe this) are called the Imamiyah, with reference to their statement that knowledge of the imam and the fact of his being appointed are an article of the faith. That is their fundamental tenet. Others consider the descendants of Fatimah the (proper) successors to the imamate, but through selection (of an imam) from among the Shi'ah. The conditions governing (selection of) that imam are that he have knowledge, be ascetic, generous, and brave, and that he go out to make propaganda for his imamate. They (who believe this) are the Zaydiyah, so named after the founder of the sect, Zayd b. 'Ali b. al-Husayn, the grandson of Muhammad. He had a dispute with his brother Muhammad al-Bagir concerning the condition that the imam has to come out openly. Al-Bagir charged him with implying that, in the way Zayd looked at it, their father Zayn-al-'abidin would not be an imam, because he had not come out openly and had made no preparations to do so. He also accused him of holding Mu'tazilah tenets which he had learned from Wasil b. 'Ata. When the Imimiyah discussed the question of the imamates of the two shaykhs (Abu Bakr and 'Umar) with Zayd, and noticed that he admitted their imamates and did not renounce them, they disavowed him and did not make him one of the imams. On account of that fact, they are called "Disavowers" (Rafidah).

18 Some (Shi'ah) consider as successors to the imamate, after 'All-or after his two sons, Muhammad's grandsons (al-Hasan and al-Husayn), though they disagree in this respect-(al-Hasan's and al-Husayn's) brother, Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyah, and then the latter's children. They are the Kaysiniyah, so named after Kaysin, a client of ('Ali's).258 There are many differences among these sects which we have omitted here for the sake of brevity. There are also (Shi'ah) sects that are called "Extremists" (ghulah). They transgress the bounds of reason and the faith of Islam when they speak of the divinity of the imams. They either assume that the imam is a human being with divine qualities, or they assume that he is God in human incarnation. This is a dogma of incarnation that agrees with the Christian tenets concerning Jesus. 'Ali himself had these (Shl'ah) who said such things about him burned to death. Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyah was very angry with alMukhtir b. Abi 'Ubayd when he learned that al-Mukhtar had suggested something along these lines concerning him. He cursed and renounced al-Mukhtir openly. Ja'far as-Sidiq did the same thing with people about whom he had learned something of the sort. Some (Shi'ah) extremists say that the perfection the imam possesses is possessed by nobody else. When he dies, his spirit passes over to another imam, so that this perfection may be in him. This is the doctrine of metempsychosis. Some extremists stop (w-q-f) with one of the imams and do not go on. (They stop with the imam) whom they consider (to have been) appointed as the (last one). They (who believe this) are the Wiqifiyah. Some of them say that the (last imam) is alive and did not die, but is removed from the eyes of the people. As a proof for that (theory), they adduce the problem of al-Khidr.259 Something of that sort has been stated with regard to 'Ali himself. He is said to be in the clouds. The thunder is his voice, and lightning his whip.260 Something similar has also been stated with regard to Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyah. He is said to be in the Mountain of Radwi in the Hijiz. The poet of (the sect holding that belief), Kuthayyir,261 says: Indeed, the Qurashite imams, The champions of the Truth, are four, all alike: 'Ali and his three sons, They are the grandsons of Muhammad. To them, no obscurity is attached. One grandson is the grandson of faith and piety. Another was "removed" through Kerbela. And there is a grandson who will not taste death, until He shall lead an army preceded by the flag. He is "removed," and has not been seen among them for a time, In Radwi, having with him honey and water. The extremist Imimiyah, in particular the Twelvers, hold a similar opinion. They think that the twelfth of their imams, Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-'Askari, to whom they give the epithet of al-Mahdi, entered the cellar of their house in al-Hillah and was "removed" when he was imprisoned (there) with his mother. He has remained there "removed." 262 He will come forth at the end of time and will fill the earth with justice. The Twelver Shi'ah refer in this connection to the tradition found in the collection of atTirmidhi regarding the Mahdi.263 The Twelver Shi'ah are still expecting him to this day. Therefore, they call him "the Expected One." Each night after the evening prayer, they bring a mount and stand at the entrance to the cellar where (the Mahdi is "removed"). They call his name and ask him to come forth openly. They do so until all the stars are out.264 Then, they disperse and postpone the matter to the following night. They have continued that custom to this time. Some of the Wigifiyah say that the imam who died will return to actual life in this world. They adduce as a proof (for the possibility of this assumption) the story of the Seven Sleepers, the one about

19 the person who passed by a village, and the one about the murdered Israelite who was beaten with the bones of the cow that (his people) had been ordered to slaughter, all of them stories included in the Qur'in.265 They further adduce similar wonders that occurred in the manner of (prophetical) miracles. However, it is not right to use those things as proof for anything except where they properly apply. The (extremist Shi'ah) poet, as-Sayyid al-Himyari'266 has the following verses on this subject: When a man's head has become gray And the barbers urge him to dye his hair, His cheerfulness is gone and no longer there. Arise, O companion, and let us weep for (our lost) youth. What is gone of it will not return To anyone until the Day of the Return, Until the day on which people will return To their life in this world before the Reckoning. I believe that this is a true belief. I do not doubt the Resurrection. In fact, God has spoken about people Who lived after they had decomposed and become dust. The religious authorities (imams) of the Shi'ah have themselves made it superfluous for us to bother with the arguments of the extremists, for they do not refer to them and thus invalidate the use (the extremists) make of their (arguments). The Kaysiniyah consider (Muhammad's) son Abu Hisham successor to the imamate after Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyah. They are therefore called the Hishimiyah. Then, they split. Some of them transferred the imamate after Abu Hisham to his brother 'Ali and then to 'Ali's son al-Hasan. Others thought that when Abu Hisham died in the land of ash-Sharih 267 upon his return from Syria, he appointed as his heir Muhammad b. 'Ali b. 'Abdallih b. 'Abbis, who, in turn, appointed as his heir his son Ibrihim who is known as the Imam. Ibrihim appointed as his heir his brother 'Abdallah b. al-Harithiyah who got the surname of as-Saffah, who, in turn, appointed as his heir his brother Abu Ja'far'Abdallah, who got the surname of al-Mansur. (The imamate) was then passed on to his children in succession through testamentary determination (nass) and appointment ('ahd), right down to the last of them. Such is the tenet of .the Hashimiyah who support the 'Abbasid dynasty. Among them were Abu Muslim, Sulayman b. Kathir, Abu Salimah al-Khallal, and other members of the (early) 'Abbasid Shi'ah268 Their right to the power is often supported by the argument that their right goes back to al-'Abbas. He was alive at the time of Muhammad's death, and he had the best title to become Muhammad's heir because of the group feeling attaching to paternal uncles (al-'Abbas being the paternal uncle of Muhammad). The Zaydiyah consider the succession to the imamate in the light of their view concerning (the institution). (The imam) is chosen by competent 268a Muslims and not appointed by testamentary determination (nass). They acknowledge as imams, 'Ali, his son al-Hasan, (al-Hasan's) brother alHusayn, (al-Husayn's) son 'Ali Zayn-al-'abidin, and ('Ali's) son, the head of the Zaydiyah, Zayd b. 'All. Zayd came forth in al-Kufah and made propaganda for the imamate. He was killed and his body exhibited in alKunasah.269 The Zaydiyah acknowledge the imamate of (Zayd's) son Yahya, as his (father's) successor. Yahya went to al-Khurasan and was killed in al-Juzajan 270 after he had appointed Muhammad b. 'Abdallah b. Hasan b. al-Hasan, (Muhammad's) grandson, as his heir. Muhammad is called "the Pure Soul" (an-Nafs as-zakiyah). He came forth in the Hijaz and took the surname of al-Mahdi. Al-Mansur's armies went against him. He was routed and killed. His brother Ibrahim was appointed his successor. He appeared in al-Basrah. With him was 'Isa b. Zayd b. 'All. Al-Mansur himself, or his generals, went against him with the army. Both Ibrahim and Isa were routed and killed 271 Ja'far as-Sadiq had told them all that (in advance). (His prediction) was considered one of Ja'far's acts of divine grace. 272

20 Other (Zaydis) assumed that the imam after Muhammad b. 'Abdallah, the Pure Soul, was Muhammad b. al-Qasim b. 'All b. 'Umar,273 'Umar being the brother of Zayd b. 'Ali. Muhammad b. alQasim came forth in at-Taliqin. He was captured and brought to al-Mu'tasim, who imprisoned him. He died in prison. Other Zaydis say that the imam after Yahya b. Zayd was his brother 'Isa, who had participated with Ibrahim b. 'Abdallah in his fight against al-Mansur. They consider his descendants the successors to the imamate. The impostor who appeared among the Negroes (Zanj during their revolt) considered him his ancestor. We shall mention that in connection with the history of the Zanj.274 Other Zaydis say that the imam after Muhammad b. 'Abdallah was his brother Idris who fled to the Maghrib and died there. His son Idris b. Idris seized power and laid out the city of Fez. His descendants succeeded him as rulers in the Maghrib, until they were destroyed, as we shall mention in connection with Idrisid history.275 Thereafter, the Zaydi power became disorganized and remained so. The missionary who ruled Tabaristan, al-Hasan b. Zayd b. Muhammad b. Isma'il b. al-Hasan b. Zayd b. alHasan, Muhammad's grandson, as well as his brother, Muhammad b. Zayd, also were Zaydis. Zaydi propaganda was then continued among the Daylam by the (Husaynid) anNasir al-Utrush. The Daylam accepted Islam from him. He was al-Hasan b. 'Ali b. al-Hasan b. 'Ali b. 'Umar, the brother of Zayd b. 'Ali. His descendants founded a dynasty in Tabaristan. They made it possible for the Daylam to obtain royal authority and control over the caliphs in Baghdad. We shall mention this in connection with the history of the Daylam.276 The Imamiyah considered (the following) as successors to the imamate after 'All al-Wasi (the "Legatee") by appointment as heirs. 'Ali's son al-Hasan, (al-Hasan's) brother al-Husayn, (al-Husayn's) son 'Ali Zayn-al-'abidin, ('Ali's) son Muhammad al-Baqir, and (Muhammad's) son Jafar asSadiq. From there on, they split into two sects. One of them considers (Ja'far's) son Ismail as Ja'far's successor to the imamate. They recognize Ismail as their imam. They are called the Isma'iliyah. The other considers (Ja'far's) son, Musa al-Kazim, as Ja'far's successor to the imamate. They are the Twelvers, because they stop with the twelfth imam. They say that he remains "removed" until the end of time, as has been mentioned before.277 The Isma'ilis say that the imam Ismail became imam because his father Ja'far appointed him (through nasr) to be his successor. (Isma'il) died before his father, but according to (the Isma'ilis) the fact that he was determined by his father as his successor means that the imamate should continue among his successors. This is analogous to the story of Moses and Aaron.278 As they say, Isma'il's successor as imam was his son Muhammad, the Concealed One (alMaktum).279 He is the first of the hidden imams. According to the Isma'ilis, an imam who has no power goes into hiding. His missionaries remain in the open, in order to establish proof (of the hidden imam's existence) among mankind. When the imam has actual power, he comes out into the open and makes his propaganda openly. As they say, after Muhammad, the Concealed One, the hidden imams were: his son Jafar al-Musaddiq, Ja'far's son Muhammad al-Habib, the last of the hidden imams, and Muhammad's son 'Ubaydallah alMahdi. For him, open propaganda was made among the Kutamah by Abu 'Abdallah ash-Shi'i. People followed his call, and he brought al-Mahdi out of his confinement in Sijilmasah. Al-Mahdi became the ruler of al-Qayrawan and the Maghrib. His descendants and successors ruled over Egypt, as is well known from their history. The Isma'ilis are called "Isma'ilis" with reference to their recognition of the imamate of Isma'il. They are also called "Batinis" with reference to their speaking about the batin, that is, the hidden, imam. They further are called "heretics," because of the heretical character of their beliefs. They have an old and a new persuasion. Neo-Isma'ili propaganda was made at the end of the fifth [eleventh] century by alHasan b. Muhammad as-Sabbah. He ruled over certain fortresses in Syria and the 'Iraq.280 His propaganda persisted there until the Turkish rulers in Egypt and the Tatar rulers in the 'Iraq destroyed it in their

21 respective territories. The persuasion for which as-Sabbah made propaganda is mentioned in ashShahrastani's Kitab al-milal wa-n-nihal.281 Among recent Shi'ah, the name of Imamiyah is often restricted to the Twelvers. They acknowledge the imamate of Musa al-Kazim b. Ja'far because his elder brother, the imam Ismail, had died while their father Ja'far was still alive. Jafar then appointed Musa (through nasr) as imam. The imams after Musa were 'Ali ar-Rida, who was appointed by al-Ma'mun as his successor (to the caliphate),282 but died before al-Ma'mun, so that nothing came of it. The imams after 'Ali, then, were ('Ali's) son Muhammad at-Taqi,(Muhammad's) son 'Ali al-Hadi, ('Ali's) son al-Hasan al'Askari, and (al-Hasan's) son Muhammad, the Expected Mahdi, whom we have mentioned before.283 There are many divergences within each of these Shi'ah persuasions. However, the sects mentioned are the most prominent ones. For an exhaustive study of Shi'ah sects, one should consult the books on religions and sects (al-milal wa-n-nihal) by Ibn Hazm,284 ash-Shahrastani, and others. They contain additional information. "God leads astray whomever He wants to lead astray, and He guides whomever He wants to guide." 285

Syed Brothers From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search This article or section has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page.

It does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve it by citing reliable sources. Tagged since March 2008. It may contain original research or unverifiable claims. Tagged since March 2008. Its introduction provides insufficient context for those unfamiliar with the subject. Tagged since June 2009.

The Syed brothers refers to Syed Hassan Ali Khan Barha (afterwards Abdullah Khan) and Syed Hussain Ali Khan Barha. Contents [hide]

1 Syeds of Barha 2 Early Appointments of the Syed Brothers in the Mughal Empire 3 Succession Crises of 1712 4 Rise of the Syed Brothers 5 Rajputana Campaign 1714 6 Clash of the Nobles

22

7 Confrontation with the Emperor 8 Deposition of Several Emperors 9 Death 10 Descendants 11 Also known as 12 See also

[edit] Syeds of Barha The Syeds of Barha are descendents of Abul Farah, of Wasit in Iraq; Several hundred years ago, at a date which cannot be fixed exactly, Abul Farah and his twelve sons came from Wasit to Mughal Empire, settling at first in four villages near Patiala, in the sarkar of Sirhind and subah of Delhi. From these villages the four branches, into which they are divided, derive their names. Then crossing the Jamuna, they formed a settlement on the eastern side of the upper Doaba, half way between Mirat and Saharanpur, in a sandy, unproductive piece of country, possibly at that time very sparsely inhabited. The etymology of the name Barha is disputed; perhaps it is from the word bara (twelve), with some allusion to the number of their villages. From the time of Akbar the Great, the men of this brave, proud and lavish clan were famous as military leaders, and by their bravery had acquired a traditional right to lead the vanguard of the Mughal troops. [edit] Early Appointments of the Syed Brothers in the Mughal Empire The two Syed brothers, who now come into such prominence, were not the mere upstarts, men of yesterday. Besides the prestige of Syed lineage, of descent from the famous Barha branch of that race, and the personal renown acquired by their own valor, they were the sons of a man who had held in Emperor Alamgir's reign first the subahdari or Governorship of Bijapur in the Deccan and then that of Ajmer, appointments given in that reign either to Princes of the blood or to the very foremost men in the State. Their father, Syed Abdullah Khan titled Syed Miyan, had risen in the service of Ruhullah Khan, Emperor Alamgir's Mir Bakhshi, and finally, on receiving an imperial mansab (rank), attached himself to the eldest Prince Muhammad Muazzam Shah Alam (later Emperor Bahadur Shah). Syed Hassan Ali Khan (afterwards Abdullah Khan) and Syed Hussain Ali Khan, two of the numerous sons of Syed Miyan were men of about 46 and 44 years of age respectively in 1712. About 1697 or 1698 the elder brother was faujdar of Sultanpur, Nazarbar in Baglana, subah Khandesh, after that, of SiuniHoshangabad also in Khandesh, then again of Nazarbar coupled with Thalner in sarkar Asir of the same subah. Subsequently he obtained charge of Aurangabad. The younger brother, Hussain Ali Khan, who is admitted by every one to have been a man of much greater energy and resolution than his elder brother, had in Emperor Alamgir's reign held charge first of Ranthambore, in subah Ajmer, and then of HindaunBayana, in subah Agra. After Prince Muizz ud-Din Jahandar Shah, the eldest of Emperor Bahadur Shah's sons, had been appointed in 1106 H. (1694-5) to the charge of the Multan province, Hassan Ali Khan and his brother followed him there. In an expedition against a refractory Baloch zamindar, the Syeds were of opinion that the honors of the day were theirs. Prince Muizz ud-Din Jahandar Shah thought otherwise, and assigned them to his then favorite administrator Isa Khan Mian. The Syeds quitted the service in dudgeon and repaired to Lahore, where they lived in comparative poverty, waiting for employment from Munim Khan, the nazim of that place. When Emperor Alamgir died and Prince Muhammad Muazzam Shah Alam, reached Lahore on his march to Agra to contest the throne, the Syeds presented themselves, and

23 their services were gladly accepted. In the battle of Jajau or Jajowan on the 18th Rabi I, 1119 H. (June 18, 1707), they served in the vanguard and fought valiantly on foot, as was the Syed habit on an emergency. A third brother, Syed Nur ud-Din Ali Khan, was left dead on the field, and Hussain Ali Khan was severely wounded. Though their rank was raised and the elder brother received his father's title of Abdullah Khan, they were not treated with such favor as their exceptional services seemed to deserve, either by the new Emperor or his vizier. The two Syeds managed to quarrel with Khanazad Khan, the vizier Munim Khan's second son, and though the breach was healed by a visit to them from the vizier in person, there is little doubt that this difference helped to keep them out of employment. Hussain Ali Khan is also said to have offended Prince Muizz ud-Din Jahandar Shah. The morning after the battle of Jajau, the Prince visited their quarters to condole with them on the death of their brother, Syed Nur ud-Din Ali Khan, and in so doing launched out into praises of their valor. Hussain Ali Khan met these overtures in an aggressive manner, saying that what they had done was nothing, many had done as much, their valor would be known when their lord was deserted and alone, and the strength of their right arm had seated him on the throne. Prince Muizz ud-Din Jahandar Shah was vexed by this speech, and refrained from making any recommendation to his father in their favor. Nay, he did his best to prevent their obtaining lucrative employment, and we read of their being obliged to rely upon the Emperor's bounty for their traveling expenses, which were necessarily great, as they were kept in attendance on the Court while it was constantly on the march. In Shaban 1120 H. (Oct. 1708) Abdullah Khan had been named to the subah of Ajmer, then in a disturbed state owing to the Rajput rising, a condition of things with which Syed Shujaat Khan seemed hardly capable of dealing. Syed Abdullah Khan had barely more than reached Delhi, in order to raise new troops and make other preparations, when the Emperor, Bahadur Shah, changed his mind and Shujaat Khan was received again into favor and maintained in his Government. At length, by the favor of Prince Azim-ush-shan, Abdullah Khan on the 21st Dhu al-Qida 1122 H. (10th Jan. 1711) became that Prince's deputy in the province of Allahabad. About two years earlier (11th Muharram 1120 H., 1 April 1708), the same patron had nominated the younger brother Hussain Ali Khan, to represent him in another of his Governments, that of Bihar, of which the capital was at Azimabad Patna. [edit] Succession Crises of 1712 When Prince Farrukhsiyar first arrived at Azimabad, Hussain Ali Khan was away on an expedition, apparently the recapture of Rohtas fort of Bihar, which about this time had been seized by one Muhammad Raza Rayat Khan. The Syed had felt annoyed on hearing that Farrukhsiyar had issued coin and caused the khutba to be read in his father, Prince Azim-ush-shan's, name, without waiting to learn the result of the impending struggle at Lahore. Thus on his return to his head-quarters his first impulse was to decline altogether that Prince's overtures. In truth, no attempt could well look more hopeless than that upon which Prince Farrukhsiyar wished to enter. The Prince's mother now hazarded a private visit to the Syeds mother, taking with her little grand-daughter. Her arguments rested on the fact that the Syeds position was due to the kindness of the Prince's father. That father, two brothers, and two uncles had been killed, and the Prince's own means were insufficient for any enterprise. Let Hussain Ali Khan then choose his own course, either let him aid Prince Farrukhsiyar to recover his rights and revenge his father's death, or else let him place the Prince in chains and send him a prisoner to Emperor Jahandar Shah. Here the Prince's mother and daughter bared their heads and wept aloud. Overcome by their tears, the Syeda called her son within the harem. The little girl fell bareheaded at his feet and implored his aid. His mother told him that whatever was the result he would be a gainer: if defeated, his name would stand recorded as a hero till Judgment Day; if successful, the whole of Hindustan would be at their feet and above them none

24 but the Emperor. Finally she exclaimed, If you adhere to Emperor Jahandar Shah, you will have to answer before the Great Judge for disavowing your mother's claim upon you. At these words Hussain Ali Khan took up the women's veils and replaced them on their heads swearing a binding oath that he would espouse the Prince's cause. The next night Prince Farrukhsiyar presented himself at the Khan's house, saying that he had come either to be seized and sent to Emperor Jahandar Shah or to enter into an agreement for the recovery of the throne. The Syed bound himself finally to fight on Prince Farrukhsiyar's behalf. He wrote at once to his elder brother, Abdullah Khan, at Allahabad, inviting him to join the same side, and Prince Farrukhsiyar addressed a farman to him making many promises, and authorizing him to expend the Bengal treasure, then at Allahabad, on the enlistment of troops. It is quite clear that at this time, or soon afterwards, the two chief places in the Empire, those of Vizier and of Amir ul Umara were formally promised to the two brothers as their reward in case of success. Abdullah Khan, on being superseded at Allahabad, gives in his adhesion to Prince Farrukhsiyar. At first Abdullah Khans intention was to submit to Emperor Jahandar Shah, the de facto Emperor, to whom he sent letters professing his loyalty and offering his services. Three months before the death of Emperor Bahadur Shah, he had gone out towards Jaunpur to restore order. In this he was not successful and the pay of his soldiers fell into arrears. The men raised a disturbance, and Abdullah Khan's only anxiety was to escape from them and take shelter within the fort of Allahabad. He promised publicly that as soon as he reached the city, all the collections then in the hands of his agents should be made over to the troops. On the return march, word came of Emperor Bahadur Shah's death.While Abdullah Khan was still in expectation of a favorable reply to his letter to Emperor Jahandar Shah, he was surprised to learn that his Government had been taken from him, and that the deputy of the new governor was on his way to take possession. The province had been granted to a Gardezi Syed of Manikpur, subah Allahabad, one Raji Muhammad Khan, who had risen to notice in the recent righting at Lahore, and through the reputation thereby acquired, had been appointed Mir Atish or general of artillery. The new governor nominated as his deputy his relation, one Syed Abdul Ghaffar (a descendant of Syed Sadar Jahan, Sadarus-Sadur, Pihanwi). Syed Abdul Ghaffar obtained contingents from one or two zamindars and collected altogether 6,000 to 7,000 men. When he drew near to Karra Manikpur,Abul Hasan Khan, a Syed of Bijapur, who was Abdullah Khan's Bakhshi, advanced at the head of 3,000 men to bar his progress. At the Battle of Sarai Alam Chand on August 2, 1712 with Abul Hasan Khan's victory for Abdullah Khan it became clear now that the Syeds were allied against the Emperor for the new contender Prince Farrukhsiyar. Prince Farrukhsiyar, meanwhile, had marched out with an army along with Syed Hussain Ali Khan Barha from Patna to Allahabad to join Syed Abdullah Khan as soon as possible. Emperor Jahandar Shah learning of the defeat of his General Syed Abdul Ghaffar sent his own son Prince Azzu-ud-Din along with Generals Lutfullah Khan and Khwaja Hussain Khan Dauran to face this army. The Second Battle of Khajwah was fought in Fatehpur District, Uttar Pradesh on November 28, 1712.Prince Farrukhsiyar decisively defeated Prince Azzu-ud-Din forcing Emperor Jahandar Shah and his Vizier the Great Zulfiqar Khan Nusrat Jung to take the field. At the Battle of Agra 1713 fought on January 10, 1713, Prince Farrukhsiyar won decisively and became the Emperor of the Mughal Empire succeeding his uncle Jahandar Shah. [edit] Rise of the Syed Brothers After his victory at the Battle of Agra 1713 Emperor Farrukhsiyar on the way from Agra to Delhi, and after arrival at Delhi, conferred many new appointments and new titles on his generals and noblemen. Syed Abdullah Khan was awarded titles Nawab Qutb-ul-mulk, Yamin-ud-daulah, Syed Abdullah Khan

25 Bahadur Zafar Jung, Sipah-salar, Yar-i-wafadar and became Vizier or Prime Minister. Syed Hussain Ali Khan was appointed first Bakhshi with the titles of Umdat-ul-mulk, Amir-ul-Umara, Bahadur, Feroze Jung, Sipah Sardar Rajputana Campaign 1714 The Rajput States had been in veiled revolt from the imperial authority for 50 years. Emperor Bahadur Shah had been unable, owing to more pressing affairs, to reduce the Rajas effectually. During the confusion which arose on that monarch's death, Ajit Singh, after forbidding slaughtering cows by Muslims for food and the call for prayer from the Alamgiri mosque, besides ejecting the imperial officers from Jodhpur and destroying their houses, had entered the imperial territory and taken possession of Ajmer. Early in Emperor Farrukhsiyar's reign it was determined that this encroachment must be put an end to; and as the Raja's replies to the imperial orders were not satisfactory, it was necessary to march against him. Hussain Ali Khan left Delhi on January 6, 1714. After a brief campaign Raghunath, a munshi in the service of Maharaja Ajit Singh of Jodhpur came to negotiate peace.Hussain Ali Khan thus advanced to Mairtha, where he halted until the terms of peace had been arranged. The terms were that the Raja should give one of his daughters in marriage to the Emperor, in the mode which they styled Dola that the Raja's son, Abhay Singh, should accompany Hussain Ali Khan to Court, and that the Raja in person should attend when summoned. Zafar Khan Roshan ud-Daulah arrived at Court on the 5th Jamadi I, 1126 H. (18 May, 1714), with the news. [edit] Clash of the Nobles During Hussain Ali Khan's absence, Ubaidullah Khan better known as Mir Jumla III became more and more powerful. Emperor Farrukhsiyar had made over his seal to this favorite, and was often heard to say openly: "The word and seal of Mir Jumla are the word and seal of Farrukhsiyar." On his side, Abdullah Khan was immersed in pleasure and found little or no leisure to devote to State affairs. Nor, being a soldier who had come into office without much preparation for civil affairs, was he very competent to deal with the details of administration, for which, moreover, he had no natural taste. Everything was left to his man of business, Ratan Chand, a Hindu of the Baniya caste, and a native of a village near the Syeds home at Jansath. He had been recently created a Raja with the rank of 2,000 zat. The chief dispute centered upon the question of appointments to office, the fees paid by those receiving appointments being a recognized and most substantial source of emolument. Ratan Chand, in addition to these customary fees, exacted large sums, which were practically bribes or payments for the grant of the appointment. By Mir Jumla's independent action in bringing forward candidates and affixing the seal to their warrants of appointment, without following the usual routine of passing them through the Viziers office, the emoluments of both Abdullah Khan and of his head officer were considerably curtailed. It is a matter of little wonder, therefore, that Abdullah Khan felt aggrieved at the unusual powers placed in the hands of a rival such as Mir Jumla. This noble was much more accessible than the Vizier, and was not given to the extortionate practices of Ratan Chand. Naturally, men in search of employment or promotion sought his audience-hall rather than that of Abdullah Khan.

26 The Vizier suffered, in this way, both in influence and in income. Moreover, Mir Jumla allowed no opportunity to pass without depreciating the Syed brothers, and brought forward arguments of every sort to prove that they were unfitted for the offices that they held. The Syed brothers could never be certain from day to day that some new plot was not being hatched for their destruction. The Rajputana campaign was the means of unmasking one of these schemes. Secret letters had been, dispatched to Maharaja Ajit Singh, urging him to strenuous resistance, and inviting him, if he could, to make away with Syed Hussain Ali Khan Barha. These letters came into Hussain Ali Khan's possession and through them he acquired proof of Emperor Farrukhsiyar's double-faced dealings. In the interval of Hussain Ali Khan's absence, Abdullah Khan had found the greatest difficulty in maintaining his position at Court. All the power was in the hands of Mir Jumla. Every day messages came from Emperor Farrukhsiyar, couched in various forms, but all urging him to resign the office of Vizier. Abdullah Khan now wrote letters to his brother enjoining him to return to Delhi with all possible speed. In response to these calls, Hussain Ali Khan, as we have seen, reached the capital again on the 5th Rajab 1126 H. (16 July, 1714). For the next two or three months the breach between the Emperor and the minister, although far from closed, was not sensibly widened. The Syeds, as was natural, looked on Farrukhsiyar's accession to the throne as the work of their hands, and resented the grant of any share of power to other persons. On the other hand, the small group of Farrukhsiyar's intimates, men who had known him from his childhood and stood on the most familiar terms with him, were aggrieved at their exclusion from a share in the spoil. The two men selected to confront the Syeds were Khwaja Asim Khan Dauran and Mir Jumla III. They were both promoted to the rank of 7,000 horse: they were placed, the former at the head of 5,000 Walashahi, and the latter of 5,000 Mughal troopers. Many of their relations were pushed forward into high rank, and counting these men's troops, each of the two nobles had at his command over ten thousand men. Among the signs of this favoritism was the order passed on the 12th Shaban September 2, 1713, permitting Mir Jumla to entertain 6,000 horsemen, who were to be specially paid from the imperial treasury. These were raised by Amanat Khan, his adopted son, from Mughals born in India, and some seventy lakhs of Rupees for their pay were disbursed from the treasury, the rules as to descriptive rolls of the men and branding of the horses being set aside. No order was issued by Farrukhsiyar without the advice and approval of the above two men. In this exercise of authority Mir Jumla assumed the lead, till at length Abdullah Khan was only the nominal, while he was the real vizier. The two Syeds bowed for the time to the Emperor's will, and made no opposition to these usurpations. Mir Jumla and Khan Dauran talked well, but evaded dealing with the kernel of the matter. Mir Jumla, having no real strength of character, knew that he was not fitted to enter the lists as a champion to fight the Syeds.He therefore made excuses and drew to one side. Khan Dauran was in reality a mere braggadocio, a big talker; and he was frightened that if he should ever be called on to take the lead, he may lose his life in the attempt to destroy the Syeds. As for the Emperor, his own troops and those of his relations were unequal to an attack on the Syeds. The imperial and Wala-shahi troops comprised many low-caste men and mere artisans held commands. The Emperor had no proof of their fighting quality.So it was decided once more to resume friendly relations with the Syed brothers. Eventually Islam Khan would negotiate a settlement whereby Mir Jumla was forced out of office in Delhi and sent to Bihar. As Hussain Ali Khan would not come to Court until Mir Jumla had left, the latter received his audience of dismissal on December 16, 1714. Four days afterwards,December 20, 1714, Hussain Ali Khan entered

27 the palace with his men, observing the same precautions as in the case of Abdullah Khan. The Emperor and the Mir Bakhshi exchanged compliments, under which their real sentiments were easily perceived. Some months before this time Hussain Ali Khan had obtained in his own favor a grant of the Deccan provinces, in super session of Nizam-ul-Mulk Chin Kilich Khan (Mir Qamar ud-Din). He had then no intention of proceeding there in person, but meant to exercise the government through a deputy, Daud Khan Panni. Their present day descendants are known as Saadat-e-Barha and still mainly reside in various parts of the Northern Indian subcontinent. [edit] Also known as There are several different spellings and terms for the Saiyid Brothers. Saiyad brothers Sayads of Barha Saiyid Brothers Saadat Bara Saiyids of Barha Saiyids of Baraha Saiyids of Bara Saeeds of Barha Saids of Barha Sayeeds of Barha Sayids of Barha Sayeed brothers Saeed brothers SAADAT-E-BARA Sadat e Bara' or Sayads of Barha or Saadat-e-Barha Saadat Bara/Saiyids of Barha is a group of twelve villages situated in the Muzaffarnagar district of Uttar Pradesh (India). The villages are: Aurangabad Jutwaara Mujhera Chitorha Kawaal Sambhalhera Kithora Balipura Behera Sadat Sandhawli Jouli Tissa Sikhrehra Belra Bilaspur These villages are mainly inhabited by Syeds, who are believed to be the desendents of the Saiyid Brothers, the king makers of the lesser mughals era. According to Saiyid Athar Abbas Rizvi in his "A Socio-Intellectual History of the Isna 'Ashari Shi'is in India," they are considered to be one of the most authetintic Sayyids, alongwith the saadats or sayyids of Nasirabad and Jais, of Raebareli district. Main occupation of the people is farming and the land in the area is quite fertile. Main crops are wheat,rice and sugarcane. There are lots of mango orchards around. Sandhawli is an important village in the area which has contributed to the intelligentsia. http://khurramsdesk.tripod.com/msrangeela.htm

28