ASHA: Blast From The Past

According to a modern writer, Fergusson’s writings on the history of Indian architecture through his construction of religious and racial categories was entirely ‘in terms of the buttressing of a single, homogenous colonial project’1, and a ‘source of ideas for the improvement of architecture in England’.2 In this classification attempted by Fergusson, he was guided by the Rankean historicism and European susceptibilities. Taste was the measure of perfection against which the stylistic units were classified. In his schema of world architecture, there were two ‘dimensions’, one chronological and the other topographical on the basis of which to divide the various styles. In the first category, according to him, the world architecture could be divided into Christian and Non-Christian or ‘Heathen’. These two divisions, according to him were ‘very nearly equal in the importance of the objects described, and very easily distinguished from another.’3 Topographically, all architecture could be classified as either Eastern, or West Asian. According to him the two great styles however were the Christian and the Saracenic which sprang from the Roman which ‘was the great transitional style between the ancient and modern world’.4

It is interesting to note that although Fergusson employs the term ‘Saracenic’ to collectively designate the styles and traditions as they developed after the coming of the Turks, his attitude towards it is more positive. The ‘Saracenic’ or ‘Mahommadan’ started with ‘Ghazni’ style, which was a stepping stone by which the western architecture was introduced in India. In fact, the fusion of Islam in India, in the words of Fergusson, freed the Indian artists from the ‘trammells of Puranic mythology’.5

Fergusson’s sub-classification of Saracenic architecture of India shows it to be a mixture of Hindu and Muslim forms. His classification of architecture was thus aimed at propagating the colonial interests of projecting the ‘decaying’ nature of the Eastern Civilization and the superiority of the West. On the other hand, this scheme, as Juneja points out, was also an attempt to “assimilate the ‘other’.”6

A severe critique of Fergusson was ultimately made by E.B. Havell who faulted the former for a lack of “essential Indianness” in the use of racial or ethnic categories.7 Havell found fault with Fergusson’s ‘persistent habit of looking outside of India for the origins of Indian art’.8 According to him all “Saracenic symbolism in architecture” was borrowed directly or indirectly “from India, Persia, Byzantium or Alexandria”.9 To Havell, the mihrāb was a Buddhist loan of the niche to Islam. Even the term butkhāna used by the Arabs for the temples was a corruption of ‘Boud-khana’ or Buddha-house.10 In fact he went on to argue that the ‘Saracenic’ art which came to India had been Indianized before it crossed the Indus.11 Thus the bulbous dome, as at the Taj Mahal, was a derivation from the Buddhist Stupa tradition.12

The obsession with ‘Indianness’ and identification with Aryan philosophy pervades the entire work of Havell. His first chapter, in the form of an introduction, deals with ‘Hindu and Saracenic art’ and the ‘Pointed Arch’. The next chapter elaborates on ‘Hindu Symbolism’ and the indigenous origins of the Taj. The next three chapters are in a chronological treatment of various regional styles like Delhi, Gujarat, Gulbarga, Mandu, Sarkhej and Gaur. The sixth chapter focuses on architectural elements like Indian arches, brackets, capitals, domes and sikhara. The next eight chapters again have a chronological framework.

A perusal of Havell’s work brings out the sum total of all the prejudices of a colonial and communal approach. The term ‘Saracenic’ appears like an anathema with all its prejudices unhindered.

The term ‘Saracenic Architecture’ was used for the styles followed by the ‘Moors’ (Muslims). The term had a long pedigree going back to the period of Crusades fought between the Christians and the Muslims. It connoted an architecture of the followers of Islam who conquered Persia, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Arabia and Spain. It was chiefly an architecture of temples and mosques. Amongst its characteristic features were counted the pointed or horse shoe arch, domes, minarets, coloured decorations with red, blue, green and gold geometrical patterns and designs, an emphasis on arabesque and a total absence of sculptures.

Having its origins in the Crusades, the term Saracenic was sometimes used in the pejorative sense. Fergusson, on the other hand, used the term as an all purpose name for the Muslim Architecture, whether in India or outside. Unlike Havell, Fergusson appears to be fairly aware and conscious of the term’s negative connotation and thus alternates the term with ‘Mahommadan’.

Even shorn of its pejorative sense, the term ‘Saracenic’ is still problematic: It borrowed heavily from two very diverse sources. On the one hand it included Persian tradition or style which was based on the vault; on the other it also included the Roman and Greek traditions from which it borrowed the true arch and the dome. Muslims joined both the streams to give shape to the ‘Saracenic’ or Muslim style.

The term ‘Saracenic’ is now out of use. The term in use presently is ‘Islamic Architecture’, and for India, Indo-Islamic. The term in any of its form further is consciously religious and thus still problematic.

The term Saracenic / Mahommadan or Islamic Architecture for the medieval period in India used in the way that Fergusson, or for that matter Havell used, would convey the pre-supposed use of arcuate: Arcuate being Islamic and Trabeate, Hindu.

Indo-Saracenic Architecture in the Colonial Period

The Indo-Saracenic style, also recognised as Indo-Gothic, was a style of architecture used by the British architects in the late 19th Century in India. It drew elements from native Indian architecture, and combined it with the Gothic revival style. In India, it was followed by a combination of different styles specific to the regions – Edwardian Baroque with Indo-Saracenic and a fusion with European architecture. 

In Edwardian Baroque with Indo-Saracenic style, the building designs were adopted from the Mughal and Rajputana styles of architecture. Key features of this category were use of Jalis – decorated stone screens – Chajjas, domes, and so on. This era also marked the accomplishment of two contrasting cultures, Indo-Saracenic Art or Indian -Islamic Art. 

The architecture of Syria and Egypt acquired a fundamental character of its own distinguished by standardised forms and concepts. The other side of Indo-Saracenic dealt with fusion with European Architecture. 

Many European architects who arrived in India took the elements of the Indo-Saracenic architecture and applied the same to the Gothic and Victorian architecture popular at that time and also to many buildings built during the 19th Century. The Palace in Mysore is a fine example of this style. IndoSaracenic architecture in India came into prominence during the latter part of the 19th Century. With the coming of the pattern, a majority of the patrons felt that they needed to be part of a particular style, which at times led to a highly inventive blend of Western and Oriental design. 

Characteristics of Indo Saracenic, which were considered for a majority of buildings of this style were onion (bulbous) domes, overhanging eaves, pointed arches, vaulted roofs, domed kiosks, pinnacles, towers or minarets, harem windows, open pavilions and pierced open archading. The chief historians of this style of architecture were Robert Fellowes Chisholm, Charles Mant, Henry Irwin, William Emerson, George Wittet and Frederick Stevens. Architecture of this era gave rise to grand public buildings, such as clock towers, courthouses, civic and municipal establishments, government colleges, town halls, railway stations, museums, and art galleries. Blend of Muslim designs and Indian materials developed by British architects in India during the late 19th and early 20th Centuries were perfect reflections of Indo-Saracenic architecture. Diverse Hindu and Mughal architectural elements were combined with Gothic cusped arches, domes, spires, tracery, minarets and stained glass, in a wonderful, almost playful manner in this epoch.

Indo-Saracenic architecture found its way into public buildings of all sorts, such as railway stations, banks and insurance buildings, educational institutions, clubs and museums. Chepauk Palace in Chennai designed by Paul Benfield is said to be the first Indo-Saracenic building in India, which incorporated elements and motifs of Hindu and Islamic precedents. Other outstanding examples are spread across the country – the Muir College at Allahabad, Napier Museum at Thiruvananthapuram, the Post Office, Prince of Wales Museum, University Hall and Library, and Gateway of India in Mumbai, M.S. University, Lakshmi Vilas Palace at Baroda, the Central Railway station, Law courts, Victoria Public Hall, Museum and University Senate House in Chennai, and the Palaces at Mysore and Bangalore.

Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus: Its majestic appearance best represents the architecture of colonial India. The combination of brick and stone along with various oriental elements enhances the appearance of CST. The domed roof is highlighted with designed ornamentation. CST is a blend of Victorian, Hindu and Islamic styles emphasising on buttresses, domes, turrets, spires and stained-glass windows. The Central Dome has eight decorated ribs highlighting Victorian elements. Adding to the station’s beauty are stained glass windows, colourful tiles and decorative iron grilles. Beneath the dome are brilliantly coloured stained glass windows, decorated with foliage. 

Engineering, Agriculture and Commerce are represented by the gaples crowned by sculptures. The Neo-Gothic vaulted roof with wooden ribs over the hall provides an impression of Victorian Gothic elements. Chatrapati Shivaji Terminus is the best example of Victorian Gothic architecture in India.

---

• Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

Notes:

[1] For a detailed analysis on this see Monica Juneja, Architecture in Medieval India, Forms, Contexts, Histories, Permanent Black, Delhi, 2001, pp. 14-25

[2] Fergusson, History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, op.cit., pp.5-6

[3] Ibid, vol. I, p. vii

[4] Ibid, I, viii

[5] Ibid., pp.45-46

[6] Juneja, op.cit., p. 19

[7] E.B. Havell, Indian Architecture: Its Psychology, Structure, and History from the First Muhammadan Invasion to the Present Day, London, 1913, pp. 1-13

[8] Ibid., p. 2

[9] Ibid., p. 4

[10] Ibid., pp.5-6

[11] Ibid., p. 11

[12] Ibid., pp. 23-24

Our only contemporary source for the Maratha administration of this period is John Fryer: all others are later works. In the kingdom of Shivaji, the Brahmins were highly respected but they were always in chains as Fryer remarked. Because they were revenue officials, so whenever they could not realize the amount, they were imprisoned. Shivaji adopted extremely harsh measures against the Canarese, who were Maratha speaking people, as well as the Kundis who were agriculturists par excellence. They were exploited to the maximum limit. Three-fourth (3/4^th) of the actual yield of the soil was taken in revenue. The whole agrarian system of Shivaji was based on tyranny and the exploitation was the rule and not an exception. In the military administration, Fryer says, the maxim was ‘No plunder, No pay!’ Fryer says that the army of Shivaji consisted of half-naked rascals. The army was not paid regularly. The soldiers were asked to plunder the area to meet their pay claims. Shivaji had an infantry and a comparatively strong navy.

On taking royal powers, Shivaji assumed the title of haindava dharmodhārak (protector of the Hindu faith). In spite of this he did not hesitate to plunder mercilessly the Hindu population of the area.

His system of administration was largely based on the administrative practices of the Deccani states.

The contention of the modern scholars that Shivaji had eight ministers is misleading. He had only eight secretaries who had no discretion in administrative affairs or matters. These were the eight ashtapradhānas, translated by Sarkar and others as ‘ministers’. Each of them was directly responsible to the ruler: thus, in other words, there was no ‘council of ministers’.

The peshwa were ministers who looked after the finance and general administration.

The commander of the army, senapati, also known as sar-i naubat held a post of honour. He was generally one of the leading Maratha chieftains. Majumdar was the accountant. The household affairs and intelligence were looked after by the waqi’a nawis. The office of Correspondence was looked after by chitnis or surunawis.

Like in other Muslim courts, the master of ceremonies in the court was the dabīr who also helped the Maratha ruler in his dealings with foreign powers.

The nyāyadhīsh and pandit rao were the incharge of department of Justice and Charitable Affairs (to give grants).

The Asthapradhans:

• Peshwa or the Chief Minister- He looked after general administration.
• Amatya or Majumdar– Accountant general, he later became revenue and finance mnister.
• Sachiv or Surunavis– Also called Chitnis; he looked after the Royal correspondence.
• Sumant or Dabir- Foreign affairs and the master of Royal ceremonies.
• Senapati or Sari-i-Naubat- Military commander. He looked after the recruitment, training and discipline of army.
• Mantri or Waqia Navis– Personal safety of the king, he looked after the intelligence, post and household affairs.
• Nyayadhish- Administration of Justice
• Punditrao- Looking after charitable and religious affairs of the state. He worked for the moral upliftment of the people.
• Apart from the departmental duties, three of the ministers- Peshwas, Schiva and the Mantri were also given incharge of extensive provinces.
• All ministers, except the Panditrao and the Nyayadish, had to serve in a war whenever necessary.

Minister was assisted by a staff of eight clerks

• Diwan – secretary
• Mujumdar – auditor and accountant
• Fadnis – deputy auditor
• Sabnis or Daftardar – office incharge
• Karkhanis – commissary
• Chitins – correspondence clerk
• Jamdar – treasurer
• Potnis – cashier

Shivaji strictly regulated the “mirasdars,” (mirasdarswere those who had the hereditary rights in land). Later mirasdars grew and strengthened themselves by building strongholds and castles in the villages. Likewise, they had become unruly and seized the country. He also destroyed their bastions and forced them to surrender.

Shivaji divided entire territory into three provinces, each under a viceroy. He further divided the provinces into Prants then Pargana and Tarafs. The lowest unit was the village which was headed by its headman or Patel.

The form of government was the worst type of dictatorship. The titles which were awarded by Shivaji to his officials were the mixture of Bijapuri and Mughal titles. High sounding titles were given to petty officials. The subadar under Shivaji was equivalent to the thanedar under the Mughals; and the faujdar under Shivaji was equivalent to chaukidars under the Mughals.so there were high sounding posts with small jurisdictions.

However the most distinctive feature of Shivaji’s administration was his organization of army and the revenue system. We come to know that under Shivaji, cash salaries were given to the soldiers. Some chiefs could also be given saranjām or revenue grants. The strict discipline in the army meant that no woman or dancing girl was allowed to accompany the army.

The regular army (paga) consisted of cavalry (30,000 to 40,000); then there were silahdārs (auxillaries) supervised by havaldars who received fixed salaries. The forts were put in the charge of three men of equal rank – to guard against treachery.

The revenue system was patterned on the system of Malik Ambar. In 1679 Annaji Datto completed the new revenue assessment. Shivaji further continued with the deshmukhi (zamindari) system and awarded mokasa (jagirs) to his officials.

Chauth: Origin & Significance

Revenue Administration:

Shivaji abolished the Jagirdari Systemand replaced with Ryotwari System, and changes in the position of hereditary revenue officials which was popularly known as Deshmukhs, Deshpande, Patils and Kulkarnis.

Shivaji strictly supervised the Mirasdarswho had hereditary rights in land.

The revenue system was patterned on the Kathi system of Malik Amber. According to this system, every piece of land was measured by Rod or Kathi.

Chauth and Sardeshmukhi were other sources of income: Chauth was amounted to 1/4^th of the standard which was paid to Marathas as a safeguard against Shivaji’s forces plundering or raiding Non-Maratha territories. Sardeshmukhi was an additional levy of 10 percent demanded from areas outside from the kingdom.

Azad Bilgrami remarked in 1761 that the Marathas, in spite of attaining most brilliant success in the battlefields, were not like emperors or kings but like zamindars. Meaning thereby – that the horizon of the Maratha leaders was limited. The entire basis of the Maratha state was tyranny and the Marathas were a failure as an empire. They could not work out even a repository of a political authority. The Raja of Satara was reduced to the position of a puppet by the Peshwas; and the Peshwas in turn, were reduced to nothingness by Nana Fardnawis [Nana Phadnis]. So they could not work out even the repository of political authority: and this was an inbuilt defect.

Chauth was a customary tax which was realized by the zamindars. It was 1/4th of the assessed revenue. During the 17th Century, the Mughal Emperor used to pay chauth to the ruler of Kathiawar. That is it was an amount which a superior authority paid to a lesser authority. Likewise, the Portuguese paid chauth on western coast to some zamindars.

The chauth levied by Shivaji has been erroneously confused with the subsidiary alliance of Lord Wellesley. Under the scheme of Wellesley, if a state paid subsidy to the British, his protection was in the hands of the Britishers. But here the Marathas after realizing the chauth provided protection against none except themselves: that is, they undertook not to plunder that area themselves. So practically it was a system of blackmail. So after realizing chauth the Marathas undertook no guarantee for them. It was 1/4th of the assessed revenue. This signified the zamindar outlook of the Marathas: they theoretically never thought beyond that. So the origin of chauth was from the zamindari rights and the term existed before the emergence of the Marathas as a political entity.

Sardeshmukhi was 1/10 th of the assessed revenue. That also was connected with the customary claim on the usufruct of the land.

Military Administration

Shivaji organised a disciplined and efficient army. The ordinary soldiers were paid in cash, but big chief and military commander were paid through jagir grants (Saranjam or Mokasa).

The army consists of Infantry i.e. Mavali foot soldiers; Cavalry i.e. Horse riders and equipment holders; Navy.

Military Personnel 

Sar-i-Naubat (Senapati)-Incharge of army

Qiladars- Officers of Forts

Nayak- Head of the member unit of infantry

Havaldar- Head of five Nayaks

Jumladar- Head of five Nayaks

Ghuraw- Boats laden with guns

Gallivat- Rowing boats 40-50 rowers

Paik- Foot SoldiersThe army was effective instrument of policies of Marathas State where rapidity of movement was the most important factors. Only in the rainy season, the army get rested otherwise rest of the year was engaged in expeditions.

Pindaries were allowed to accompany the army who were allowed to collect“Pal-Patti” which was 25% of war booty.

Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

During the reign of Aurangzeb an attempt was made to introduce free education, but unfortunately the attempts were not successful. However as an experiment Aurangzeb ordered the opening of madrasas to cater to the Bohras of Gujarat. Teachers were appointed and a system of monthly examination was introduced. It was further ordained that the result of the students would be communicated to the emperor for his personal assessment.

Bernier, the French traveller who was in India during Aurangzeb’s reign, deplored the deficiencies of the educational system. To prove his point, he quoted Aurangzeb’s reproaches against his tutor for having wasted time on grammar and metaphysics, while ignoring geography, history, and politics. [Bernier pp. 155–57]

 No attempt was made to control education, even though the state gave large grants of rent-free lands to ulama for setting up madrasas. There were no regular examinations, and no organization for maintaining standards. Yet Mughal education had its special values, for Muslim education did not decay in the eighteenth century with the decline of Muslim political authority. The reduced calls made by the state employment on Muslim manpower left more men free to devote themselves to academic and literary work. A number of educational institutions and foundations, including the colleges established by Ghazi-ud-din Khan Firuz Jang, Sharaf-ud-daulah, and Raushan-ud-daulah in Delhi belong to this period.

        The standardization of the educational curriculum was accomplished in the eighteenth century. The Dars-i-Nizamiya, named after Mulla Nizam-ud-din (d.1748) provided instruction in grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, logic, scholasticism, tafsir (commentary on the Quran), fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), hadith, and mathematics. This curriculum has been criticized for containing too many books on grammar and logic and in general for devoting too much attention to formal subjects, and too little to useful secular subjects like history and natural sciences or even religious subjects like tafsir and hadith. But it provided good mental discipline, and its general adoption was responsible for the widespread interest in intellectual and philosophical matters. In the period in which it was systematized it was perhaps reasonably adequate for the average student. Those wishing to specialize or pursue a particular branch of knowledge went to the experts in that subject. The needs of the students specially interested in religious subjects were better served at institutions like Madrasa-i-Rahimiya, the forerunner of the modern seminary of Deoband, where tafsir and hadith were the principal subjects of study, but for those needing a general education to qualify for the posts of munshis, qazis, or religious preachers, Dars-i-Nizamiya provided a satisfactory basis until modern times.

        Bernier, despite his criticism of the educational system, has left evidence that, at least two intellectuals of the Mughal court tried to learn about Western philosophy. One of them was Fazil Khan, the prime minister, whom Bernier taught

“the principal languages of Europe, after he had translated for him the whole philosophy of Gassendi in Latin, and whose leave [to depart] he could not obtain, until he had copied for him a select number of best European books, thereby to supply the loss he should suffer of his person.”

The other was Danishmand Khan, who supported Bernier for a number of years.

“My Nawab, Agha Danishmand Khan, expects my arrival with much impatience,” Bernier wrote. “He can no more dispense with his philosophical studies in the afternoon than avoid devoting the morning to his weighty duties as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and Grand Master of the Horse. Astronomy, geography, and anatomy are his favorite pursuits, and he reads with avidity the works of Gassendy and Descartes.”

[Bernier, pp. 352–53]

For the Hindus, Banaras was an important seat of learning. According to Bernier it could be considered as ‘the general school of the Gentiles’. He in fact compares it and calls it as the ‘Athens of India’. As he is comparing the Indian learning with Europe and fails to comprehend the indigenous method of teaching, he is constrained to comment that the town however ‘contains no colleges or regular classes, as in our universities’. He goes on to mention that the eminent teachers took their classes with ‘four disciples, others six or seven, and most eminent may have twelve twelve or fifteen’. These students would sit at the feet of their tutors ‘in different parts of the town in private houses’ and merchants’ gardens in the suburb of the town for ‘ten or twelve years’, during which time ‘the work of instruction proceeds but slowly’.

[Bernier, p. 334]

He further says that this pursuit of knowledge ‘entertains no hope that honours or emoluments’ may be awarded to them at the end. The scholars’ dietary wants were taken care of in the shape of ‘kichery, a mingled mess of vegetables’ supplied by the rich merchants.

[Bernier, p. 335]

Tavernier on the other hand describes a college established by Raja Jai Singh at Banaras near the Temple of Visvesvara. This college, he says, was meant for the education of the young men ‘of good families’. The medium of instruction was Sanskrit:

“I saw the children of the Prince, who were being educated there by several Brahmans, who taught them to read and write in a language which is reserved to the priests of the idols (i.e. Sanskrit) and very different from that spoken by the people.”

[Tavernier, II, pp. 182-83]

Tavernier while describing this institution further says:

“…throwing my eyes upwards, I perceived a double gallery which ran all round it (the building), and in the lower the two Princes were seated, accompanied by many young nobles and numerous Brahmans, who were making different figures like those of mathematics, on the ground with chalk.”

[Tavernier, II, p. 183]

It is also interesting to note that Tavernier mentions that the college teachers had in their possession two globes, presented to them by the Dutch. Tavernier says that when enquired where France was ‘I pointed out the position of France upon them’.

[Ibid]

Sultan Murad IV, the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire from 1623-1640, would often anonymously go into the midst of the people and see their state. One evening, he felt an uneasiness in himself and the urge to go out. He called for his head of security and out they went. They came to a busy vicinity, and found a man lying on the ground. The Sultan prodded him but he was dead and the people were going about their own business. Nobody seemed to care about the dead man lying on the ground.

The Sultan called upon the people. They didn’t recognize him and asked him what he wanted. He said, “Why is this man lying dead on the ground and why does no one seem to care?

Where is his family? “They replied, “He is so and so, the drunkard and fornicator!”

The Sultan said, “Is he not from the Ummah of Muhammad SAW? Now help me carry him to his house” The people carried the dead man with the Sultan to his house and once they reached, they all left. The Sultan and his assistant remained.

When the man’s wife saw his dead body, she began weeping. She said to his dead body, “Allah have mercy on you! O friend of Allah! I bear witness that you are from the pious ones.

“The Sultan was bewildered. He said, “How is he from the pious ones when the people say such and such things about him. So much so that no one even cared he was dead?”

She replied, “I was expecting that. My husband would go to the tavern every night and buy as much wine as he could. He would then bring it home and pour it all down the drain. He would then say, “I saved the Muslims a little today.” He would then go to a prostitute, give her some money and tell her to close her door till the morning. He would then return home for a second time and say, “Today I saved a young woman and the youth of the believers from vice.”

The people would see him buy wine and they would see him go to the prostitutes and they would consequently talk about him. One day I said to him, “When you die, there will be no one to bathe you, there will be no one to pray over you and there will be no one to bury you!”He laughed and replied, “Don’t fear, the Sultan of the believers, along with the pious ones shall pray over my body.”

The Sultan began crying. He said, “By Allah! He has said the truth, for I am Sultan Murad. Tomorrow we shall bathe him, pray over him and bury him.” And it so happened that the Sultan, the scholars, the pious people and the masses prayed over him.

We judge people by what we see and what we hear from others. Only if we were to see what was concealed in their hearts, a secret between them and their Lord.

“O you who believe, abstain from many of the suspicions. Some suspicions are sins. And do not be curious (to find out faults of others), and do not backbite one another. Does one of you like that he eats the flesh of his dead brother? You would abhor it. And fear Allah. Surely Allah is Most-Relenting, Very-Merciful.” (Quran 49:12)

• Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

[Extract from Encyclopaedia Iranica, Vol. XIV, Fasc. 2, pp. 136-143 (2012)]

Mahdism in Twelver Shiʿism inherited many of its elements from previous religious trends. Without necessarily going back to Zoroastrianism, Manichaeism, Judaism, and Christianity, to which generally eschatology, messianism, and the apocalyptic in Islam owe many of their doctrines and elements (Darmesteter, introduction; Margoliouth, pp. 125-28), one can think of numerous Shiʿite and non-Shiʿite sects that existed prior to the definitive transition from earlier Imamism to Twelver Shiʿism in the first half of the 10th century (Kohlberg 1976, passim). In the study that follows, a descriptive introduction to the doctrines will be accompanied by an overview of the contribution of these borrowed elements in order to better appreciate the historical development and evolution of the articles of faith.

Hesitation and progressive development of Mahdism.

According to the traditional date most often retained, Imam Ḥasan ʿAskari (q.v.), the eleventh Imam, died in 874. His death, like that of previous Imams, gave rise to a period of turbulence among the faithful, but this time the crisis seemed even more serious and the Imamis did not themselves hesitate to call the decades that were to follow “the period of perplexity” or “confusion” (ḥayra; Modarressi, introduction). The mysterious fate of the presumed son of the eleventh Imam led to several schisms with notable doctrinal variances. Some groups claimed that his son died at a very young age, others that he had lived until a certain age and then died, and still others simply denied his very existence, believing that Ḥasan ʿAskari never had a son. Only a small minority supported the idea that the son of the eleventh imam was alive, that he was in “occultation,” and that he was to reappear as mahdi (Ar. “the Guided One”) at “the end of time” (āḵer al-zamān). This idea was gradually adopted by all Imamis, who thus became known as “Twelvers” (Nowbaḵti, pp. 90 ff.; Ašʿari Qomi, pp. 102 ff.: Kohlberg, 1976, passim; Sachedina 1981, pp. 42-55; Hussain, pp. 56-67).

Sources from this period, reflect, in their particular manner, the hesitation and crisis believers experienced. A close study of these sources indeed seems to show that profound uncertainties and serious lacunae existed regarding a substantial number of important doctrinal elements that became articles of faith. First, the definitive number of Imams and even the notion of “occultation” (ḡayba, q.v.): Abu Jaʿfar Barqi (d. 887 or 893), in his Ketāb al-maḥāsen, contributes no information regarding these two points. In the first chapter, dedicated to different interpretations of numbers, he takes into account the numbers 3 to 10, but says nothing about the number 12 (Barqi, I, pp. 3-13). A few decades later, Ebn Bābuya (Ebn Bābawayh, q.v.; 923-91), known as Shaikh Ṣaduq, in his Ketāb al-ḵeṣāl, reported many traditions regarding the number 12, some among them about twelve Imams (Ebn Bābuya, 1950, II, pp. 264-329). Barqi’s contemporary, Ṣaffār Qomi (d. 902-3) in his Baṣāʾer al-darajāt (pp. 280, 319-20, 372) mentions only five traditions from a total of almost 2,000 regarding the notion that the Imams were to be twelve in number, and he reports nothing about the occultation. The oldest text of certain authenticity that we have, in which a complete list of the twelve Imams is found, seems to be the Tafsir by ʿAli b. Ebrāhim Qomi (d. ca. 919; Qomi, II, p. 44), a work written some years after what would finally be termed the “Minor Occultation” (see below).

It is only from Kolayni’s (d. 940-41) hadith collection onwards that traditions regarding the definitive number of Imams, and the occultation of the twelfth Imam became more frequent. Even so, a study of chains of transmission (esnād) of these traditions, not only in Kolayni, but also in the two voluminous monographs by his famous successors, namely Ketāb al-ḡayba by Ebn Abi Zaynab Noʿmāni (d. ca. 956 or 971), and Kamāl al-din by Ebn Bābuya (see bibliography), reveal that elements of older books on the ḡayba belonging to other Shiʿite trends had been appropriated in the service of the cause, and were adapted to Twelver Shiʿite doctrines (Hussain, pp. 2-6; Amir-Moezzi, 1996, esp. pp. 115 ff.). As examples, one can cite the following names of transmitters: Ebrāhim b. Ṣāleḥ Anmāṭi, disciple of the fifth Imam, Moḥammad Bāqer, authored a book on the occultation and considered the latter as the hidden Mahdi (Najāši, pp. 12, 19; Ṭusi, 1972, p. 14). Among the Wāqefis of the seventh Imam Musā Kāẓem (i.e., those who ended the lineage of the Imams at the latter and considered him as the Mahdi), were ʿAli b. Ḥasan Ṭāṭari Ṭāʿi and Ḥasan b. Moḥammad b. Somāʿa, both authors of works on the ḡayba (Najāši, pp. 193 and 39 respectively; Ṭusi 1972, pp. 216-17 on the first mentioned author). Another “Sevener” transmitter (Wāqefi or Ismaʿili?), Moḥammad b. Moṯannā Ḥażrami (fl. 9th cent.), author of a Ketāb that is part of the “400 original texts” (al-oṣul al-arbaʿomeʾa) of the Imamis, reports a tradition by Jaʿfar Ṣādeq according to which the number of Imams is limited to seven, with the final one to be the Mahdi (al-oṣul al-arbaʿomeʾa, fol. 53b; regarding this collection see Kohlberg, 1987). Ḥasan b. ʿAli Baṭāʾeni Kufi, like his father, served as Wāqefi of the eighth Imam ʿAli al-Reżā (q.v.). He was the author of a work bearing the title Ketāb al-Ḡayba (Ṭehrāni, XVI, p. 76, no. 382). Abu Saʿid ʿOṣfuri (d. 864), a contemporary of the tenth and eleventh Imams is the author of another Ketāb from the “400 original texts” in which he speaks of eleven Imams (though avoiding naming them), with the last to be the Mahdi (al-oṣul al-arbaʿomeʾa, fol. 10a ff.; also Ketāb Abu Saʿid al-ʿOṣfuri, p. 34). The book, already mentioned by the Imami Ṣaffār Qomi, even contains two traditions that seem to indicate that the Imams will be seven in number (Ṣaffār, pp. 146, 150).

One also encounters signs of hesitation and grasping for ideas concerning the nature and modalities of the occultation. Different theories appear to have co-existed in the decades following the death of the eleventh Imam. One discerns a trace of this in reports regarding a character as influential as Abu Sahl Nowbaḵti (d. 923), who would have played a determining role in the establishment of a definitive form of the theology of occultation (Eqbāl, s.v.; Arjomand 1996a and 1996b). Indeed, the sources attribute two different conceptions of the occultation to him. According to the first, cited by Ebn Bābuya, based on Ketāb al-tanbih wa’l-emāma, a work by Abu Sahl now apparently lost, the Hidden Imam “exists in the world by his spiritual substance thanks to a subsisting essence” (mawjud al-ʿayn fi’l-ʿālam wa ṯābet al-ḏāt: Ebn Bābuya 1985, I, pp. 90 ff.). According to a second theory reported by Ebn Nadim (d. 990; see also AL-FEHREST), Abu Sahl is said to have maintained that the twelfth Imam died, but secretly left behind a son as a successor to him; the lineage of Imams would thus be perpetuated in occultation from father to son until the final Imam manifests himself publicly as the Mahdi (Ebn al-Nadim, p. 225). Eventually, none of the theories were sustained, but here one recognizes tentative efforts (undoubtedly among the oldest) to rationalize the concept of occultation. During the same period, Abu Jaʿfar Ebn Qebba (d. before 931) wrote some texts with the same objective, such as his Masʾala fi’l-emāma and al-Naqż ʿalā Abi’l-Ḥasan ʿAli b. Aḥmad b. Baššār fi’l-ḡayba(both edited in Modarressi, 1993). The rationalizing theorization of the concept of occultation continued in full force with Shaikh Mofid (d. 1022) and his disciples, Šarif Mortażā (d. 1044), Mo-ḥammad b. ʿAli Karājaki (d. 1057), and Shaikh Abu Jaʿfar Ṭusi, known as Šayḵ al-Ṭāʾefa (d. 1067), thinkers who explicitly had recourse to dialectical demonstration drawing notably from some older Muʿtazilite principles (Sachedina 1981, pp. 108 ff.; see bibliography).

Other uncertainties and contradictions concern the notion of the “double occultations” and belief in the “delegation” (niāba, sefāra, wekāla) and the “four delegates or deputies” (nowwāb / sofarāʾ arbaʿa) of the Hidden Imam. We shall consider them further on.

All this tends to show that during this period the Imami community underwent what one might consider a serious identity crisis. This “time of confusion” is one of groping in the dark, of research, development, and the more or less painful establishment of doctrines related to the authority and legitimacy of the twelfth Imam. These doctrines were faced with, and overcame, much resistance before eventually standing as articles of faith. The transition from Imami Shiʿism to Twelver Shiʿism was certainly not achieved seamlessly (Kohlberg, 1976). In the introduction of his Ketāb al-Ḡayba, Ebn Abi Zaynab Noʿmāni laments the fact that a large majority of his co-religionists still did not know the identity of the Hidden Imam, or even go so far as to contest his existence (Noʿmāni, pp. 18-32). Ebn Bābuya makes a similar observation when he says that he was inundated by questions from the Shiʿites of Khorasan regarding the identity of the Hidden Imam and this, in fact, was what prompted him to write his Kamāl al-din (Ebn Bābuya 1985, I, pp. 2 ff.). In this confused atmosphere in which schisms were growing in number (Sachedina, 1981, pp. 42 ff.) and adversarial movements, particularly the Ismaʿilis, justifiably benefited from the situation, propaganda intensified and as a consequence the Twelver Shiʿite trend saw a large number of its faithful, including some notable personalities, abandon its ranks (Halm, 1981, passim). The main preoccupation of Twelver Shiʿite thinkers at this time was to demonstrate the actual existence of the son of Imam Ḥasan al-ʿAskari, and to establish his legitimate authority as the Hidden Imam. This objective was attained thanks to the sustained efforts of a certain number of thinkers and transmitters of traditions, some of whom have already been cited: Nowbaḵti, Abu Jaʿfar Ebn Qebba, Kolayni, Noʿmāni, and especially Ebn Bābuya and his masterly Kamāl al-din, the principal architect of the canonization of elements relating to the Hidden Imam, his occultation, and status as eschatological Savior (Amir-Moezzi, 1996, pp. 122 ff.). Still, one can list some authors and their works that were decisive in the definitive establishment of doctrines regarding the Mahdi of the Twelvers: the father of Ṣaduq, ʿAli b. Ḥosayn Ebn Bābuya (d. 940) and his book, al-Emāma wa’l-tabṣera men al-ḥayra; Ebn Quluya (Ebn Qulawayh, q.v., d. 979) and his Kāmel al-ziārāt; Ḵazzāz Rāzi (2nd half of 10th cent.) and his Kefāyat al-aṯar; and Ebn ʿAyyāš Jawhari (d. 1011) and his Moqtażab al-aṯar (see bibliography). Consequently, when Shaikh Ṭusi (d. 1067) wrote his Ketāb al-Ḡayba, a substantial monograph on the subject, articles of faith regarding the Mahdi of the Twelver Imamis appeared already well established: that the son of the eleventh Imam is indeed the twelfth and final Imam; that he had two occultations: during the first and much shorter one, he communicated with believers through the intermediary of four delegates. During the second, which is to last until the end of time, he remains providentially living in his physical body in order to return to save the world as Mahdi. We shall now examine these points in greater detail.

Birth and occultation of the Mahdi.

What precisely do traditional accounts of the Mahdi relate? Versions that would eventually be considered “orthodox” began to emerge in the first half of the 10th century and only attained their definitive form in the following century. For what follows, we base our information mainly on the works of authors such as Noʿmāni, Ebn Bābuya (1985), and Shaikh Ṭusi (1965), to cite only the most important monographs on the subject.

The eschatological Savior of Imamism is presented as Abu’l-Qāsem Moḥammad b. Ḥasan al-ʿAskari, twelfth and last among the Imams. He therefore bears the same name and konya as the Prophet, thus fulfilling the hadith that probably goes back to ʿĀṣem b. Bahdala (d. 744-45) from Kufa. It undoubtedly owes its origin to Moḵtār’s rebellion in favor of Moḥammad b. al-Ḥanafiya, son of ʿAli, who, once when he was described as Mahdi, declared that his privilege consisted in bearing the same name and konya as the Prophet (Ebn Saʿd, V, p. 68; Madelung, “al-Mahdī,” p. 1223a). However, it was inadvisable to call the Mahdi by his name, according to a ban attributed to many among the imams (al-nahy ʿan al-esm/al-manʿ ʿan al-tasmiya), the aim of which was to protect the Savior (commissioned to put an end to injustice) from the threat posed by the ʿAbbasid court (Kolayni, n.d., II, pp. 126 ff.; Noʿmāni, chap. 16; Ebn Bābuya, 1985, I, pp. 333 ff., 370; II, p. 648; Amir-Moezzi, 1992, pp. 257-59). This also reflected uncertainties that weighed upon the identity of the Mahdi. The latter is thus called by any one of his surnames: mahdi (the Guided One), montaẓar (the Awaited One), ṣāḥeb al-zamān (Lord of the Time), al-ḡāʾeb (the Occulted/Hidden One), ḥojjat Allāh (Proof of God), ṣāḥeb al-amr (Lord of the Cause), baqiyat Allāh (Remainder of God) and, most often, qāʾem (a complex term meaning among other things: the standing, one who stands up, one who rises, the resurrector). The latter title, which among the Imamis gradually replaced that of Mahdi, was employed in Shiʿite circles to designate the Imam who “stood up” to fight against unjust and illegitimate power. In this sense, it contrasted with qāʿed, literally “the seated one,” a term designating previous imams who did not participate in rebellious movements against Umayyad and ʿAbbasid rule (Nowbaḵti, pp. 90 ff.; Aš-ʿari Qomi, pp. 102 ff.; Sachedina, 1981, s.v.; Madelung, “Ḳāʾim Āl Muḥammad”).

According to some accounts, his mother, to whom various names are given (Narjis, Rayḥāna, Sawsan, Maryam), was a black slave of Nubian origin (the first three names, being those of flowers and plants, and often given to female slaves, seems to confirm this version); according to other accounts, undoubtedly legendary and hagiographic, she was the grand-daughter of the Byzantine emperor, himself a disciple of the Apostle Simon. According to this version, the Byzantine princess was captured by Muslim troops and sold as a slave in Baghdad to a man belonging to the entourage of the tenth Imam, ʿAli al-Naqi (see ʿALI AL-HĀDI) who then came to Sāmarrāʾ and offered the girl to Ḥakima, the latter’s sister. Even before her captivity, the princess had a dream vision of Mary, mother of Jesus, as well as of Fāṭema (q.v.), daughter of the Prophet Moḥammad, both of whom had asked her to convert to Islam and let herself be captured by the Muslim armies as she was destined for a glorious life. In Sāmarrāʾ, the tenth Imam, having by clairvoyance recognized in her the future mother of the Mahdi, gave her in marriage to his son Ḥasan, the future eleventh Imam. Signs of the mother’s pregnancy as well as the birth of the child were miraculously concealed, since the ʿAbbasids sought to eliminate an expected child whom persistent rumors described as a Savior. The date most often cited for his birth is 15 Šaʿbān 256/18th July 870 (one of the most important Imami festivals). The father showed the newborn to some forty intimate disciples, and then the child was hidden. According to many accounts, the eleventh imam is said to have adopted a two-fold tactic to guarantee the child’s security. First, apart from his intimate circle, the Imam kept the birth of the child secret, going so far as to designate his mother, Ḥodayṯ, as his sole heir. Now, it is known that according to Imami law, under some conditions the inheritance belongs to the mother of the deceased when the latter does not leave behind a child. Secondly, Imam Ḥasan al-ʿAskari had recourse to a ruse to cloud the issue and distract attention. Some time before his death in 874, he allowed a rumor to spread that his servant Ṣaqil was pregnant with his child. Informants of the caliph al-Moʿtamed (r. 870-92) closely observed the activities of the Imam, who was kept under surveillance in the military camp at Sāmarrāʾ. When, following a serious illness, the Imam’s death seemed inevitable, the caliph dispatched his trusted men to the site. After the eleventh Imam died, his servant was arrested for observation. During the year that followed, she showed no signs of pregnancy and was released and promptly forgotten. The caliph and his entourage were then convinced that the deceased eleventh Imam left behind no descendants. According to Imami authors, divine providence had been accomplished. The twelfth Imam, the awaited Savior, was thus saved and grew up in hiding (for these accounts and a critical analysis of them, see Amir-Moezzi, 1992, pt. IV-1 and IV-2). This “gilded legend” meets the obvious hagiographic requirements, but at the same time it reflects the uncertainties that continued to be felt in Imami circles regarding the very existence of a child of Imam Ḥasan al-ʿAskari. This led, as we have seen, to a number of schisms. It is certainly no accident that the sources present “the concealed birth” as one of the distinctive signs of the Savior (Noʿmāni, chap. 10, no. 7, p. 244; Ebn Bābuya, 1985, I, chap. 32, no. 2, p. 325).

Not unlike previous imams, the Mahdi had a birth and childhood bathed in the miraculous. Supernatural signs, divine lights, and celestial messengers accompanied him from his very birth. From his early childhood on, he demonstrated initiatory knowledge and manifested supernormal powers. Our sources regularly relate that even while in hiding, the young twelfth Imam was visited by initiated adepts of his father, and the latter never missed an occasion to reveal to his followers that his son was indeed the qāʾem. Upon the death of his father in 260/874, the twelfth Imam entered his first occultation while still a child, later termed the Minor Occultation (al-ḡaybat al-ṣoḡrā), which lasted 70 lunar years, i.e., until 329/940. During this period, the Hidden Imam is said to have communicated with his believers through four intermediary delegates or representatives: (1) Abu ʿAmr ʿOṯmān b. Saʿid ʿAmri/ʿOmari; (2) Abu Jaʿfar Moḥammad ʿAmri/ʿOmari, son of the above; (3) Abu’l-Qāsem Ḥosayn b. Ruḥ, from the influential family of the Banu Nowbaḵt; and (4) Abu’l-Ḥasan ʿAli b. Moḥammad Semmari (regarding these representatives and the sources see Ali, pp. 197 ff.; Hussain, chap. IV-VII; on the vocalization of the fourth name, usually erroneously pronounced Samarri, see Halm, 1988, chap. 4, s.v.).

The most important activities of these “representatives” would have included ensuring that canonical precepts were respected by the believers, the collection and distribution of taxes, delivering questions of a religious nature to the Hidden Imam, making his responses known in public and, finally, performing miracles to convince those believers who were prey to perplexity and confusion. Ebn Bābuya dedicates several pages of his Kamāl al-din to enumerating and describing the supernatural powers of the representatives, perceived by the faithful to be the result of direct initiation by the Hidden Imam (Ebn Bābuya, 1985, II, pp. 486-520; Amir-Moezzi, 1992, pp. 272-75).

According to official tradition, in 329/940, the fourth and last delegate received a final letter signed by the Hidden Imam in which he declared that henceforth and “until the end of time,” no one will see him or be his representative, and that whosoever declares otherwise is no less than an imposter. This important document, apparently reported for the first time by Ebn Bābuya in his Kamāl al-din (II, chap. 45, no. 44, p. 516), heralds the second, or Major Occultation (al-ḡaybat al-kobrā), which according to Twelver Shiʿite doctrine still continues and will last until the eschatological return of the Mahdi (regarding this letter, reports concerning it in ancient sources, and translations of it into Western languages, see Amir-Moezzi 1996, pp. 122-23 and n. 51). Thus, for more than a thousand years the Imamis have lived in a period of Major Occultation of the Hidden Imam. Imami tradition cites four principal reasons to prove the necessity of the occultation: safeguarding the life of the Hidden Imam; independence with regard to temporal powers which, according to some traditions, will all be unjust until the return of the Mahdi; testing believers in order to measure the degree of their faith; and finally, a secret reason not to be revealed until the end of time (Kolayni, n.d., II, pp. 127-45; Noʿmāni, chap. 10; Ebn Bābuya, 1985, chap. 44; idem, 1966, chap. 179; Ebn ʿAyyāš, pp. 34-36; Ṭusi 1965, pp. 73 ff. pp. 109-11, 214-15). It must be emphasized that the concept of two occultations, the first shorter than the second, originated in the beliefs of the Wāqefis of the seventh Imam Musā al-Kāẓem. For them, these two occultations constituted a distinctive sign of the Mahdi, obviously here alluding to the two periods of imprisonment of the seventh Imam, the first of a shorter period under the caliphate of the ʿAbbasid caliph al-Mahdi (r. 775-85), and the second, lasting until the death of the Imam, ordered by Hārun al-Rašid (r. 786-809; Madelung, “al-Mahdī,” p. 1226b). This Wāqefi origin also seems at issue in a hadith, preserved by the Twelver Shiʿite corpus, that mentions the imprisonment of the Savior (Noʿmāni, p. 288; Ebn Bābuya, 1985, II, p. 548; Ṭusi, 1965, p. 181). As a corollary to the preceding concept, belief in the delegation of four official representatives of the Hidden Imam during the first occultation seems to have started to take form long after the proclamation of major occultation, most likely in the second half of the 10th century. As we have seen, Barqi and Ṣaffār do not even deal with the theme of occultation. With two authors from the end of the 9th century, namely Nowbaḵti in his Feraq al-šiʿa, and Ašʿari Qomi in his Maqālāt, there is still no mention of any representative. The same is true of Noʿmāni, who wrote in the first half of the next century. During the same period, Kolayni in his Kāfi, and Kašši in his Rejāl, provide names of several “representatives” (for example the two ʿAmri/ʿOmari, Ebrāhim b. Mahziyār, Marzbāni Ḥāreṯi, Ḥājez b. Yazid, etc.), but never speak of an official list of four individuals (Kolayni, n.d., II, pp. 449 ff.; Kašši, s.v.). In her well-documented study, V. Klemm convincingly demonstrates that Ḥosayn b. Ruḥ Nowbaḵti (d. 938), the “third” nāʾeb, would have been the first to claim to be the only representative of the Hidden Imam, and as a consequence, the supreme leader of the community in the absence of the latter. According to Klemm, the dogma of delegation to the Hidden Imam by a sole representative seems to have been invented and spread by the powerful Nowbaḵti family in Baghdad. The two previous claimants, the two ʿAmri/ʿOmaris, were no doubt elevated to the status of sole representative posthumously to prove to believers the continuity of this institution since the presumed beginning of the occultation (Klemm, passim). This conception of the niāba was far from being accepted without hesitation or resistance, and one has to wait almost half a century until the Kamāl al-din by Ebn Bābuya has it take its more or less definitive canonical form for the first time. “More or less,” indeed, since even Ebn Bābuya, who provides the list of “four representatives,” speaks of other trusted men of the Hidden Imam in different cities (Ebn Bābuya, 1985, II, pp. 432, 442).

Let us end this section by recalling an interesting phenomenon at the time of the occultation that increases devotion to the Hidden Imam and strengthens faith in his invisible presence: accounts of meetings with the Mahdi. Hagiographic literature dedicated to the twelfth Imam has always accorded a special place to accounts of meetings with the Mahdi. It covers a period of almost one thousand years, ranging from some decades after the occultation with, for example, Kolayni, until the contemporary period with monographs by Mirzā Ḥosayn Ṭabarsi/Ṭabresi Nuri (d. 1902), which are veritable encyclopedias of this genre, and Beḥār al-anwār by ʿAllāma Moḥammad-Bāqer Majlesi (d. 1699-1700: see bibliography). Regarding encounters during the Major Occultation, henceforth a question arises to which some Imami thinkers have responded: how to consider accounts of meetings during the Major Occultation authentic when in his final letter to his last representative the Imam declares any encounter to be impossible until the end of time? It is important to note that Ebn Bābuya, who reports this letter in his Kamāl al-din, does not hesitate to relate in the same work some accounts of meetings with the Hidden Imam after his Major Occultation. From the very beginning, ocular vision of the imam, to which the letter refers, seems to have been understood not in a general sense, but as a condition of the Hidden Imam’s representative. Thus, what is declared impossible during the major occultation (thus until the end of time) is not an encounter with the Hidden Imam as such, but laying claim to the niāba of the latter by citing a meeting with the Hidden Imam as grounds. A believer may be granted the privilege of meeting the Imam, but if following this he declares himself to be the “representative” of the Imam due to the encounter, he is considered (according to terms of the letter) no less than a liar and impostor (Šarif Mortażā, n.d., pp. 233 ff.; Ebn Ṭāwus, 1931, pp. 34, 48, 73-75; Majlesi, LII, p. 151; Ṭabarsi/Ṭabresi Nuri, 1991, chap. 8, pp. 559 ff.).

These encounters may occur anywhere, but certain sites seem to be more propitious: Mecca; beside the Imams’ mausoleums; the Cave (sardāb) in Sāmarrāʾ where the Hidden Imam is said to have begun his occultation; the mosque of Sahla in Najaf, and the sanctuary of Jamkarān, not far from Qom (Amir-Moezzi, 1997, first part). Typologically, one can distinguish three categories of narratives of encounters, based on the principal dimension promoted: a humanitarian dimension in which the great generosity of the Hidden Imam towards his believers and his concern for their well-being are emphasized; an initiatory dimension in which the Imam teaches his believers prayers, transmits spiritual knowledge, and bears secrets etc.; and finally, an eschatological dimension, presented mainly by late mystical sources, in which the encounter prompts a believer’s individual spiritual resurrection (Amir-Moezzi, 1996, passim, esp. pp. 127-35; see also Corbin, 1963-64, pp. 67 ff., and idem, 1972, book VII, esp. pp. 346-67).

The end of time and rising of the Mahdi.

These subjects have been discussed at length in the article dedicated to Twelver Shiʿite eschatology (Amir-Moezzi, 1998). Here we mostly summarize this work, contributing additional information where necessary. The “end of time” or, in other words, the date of the final advent of the Hidden Imam, is unknown and believers are urged to await deliverance (faraj) patiently and piously. The future coming of the Savior is the most frequently cited subject in predictions made by the Prophet, Fāṭema, and the Imams: entire lengthy chapters are dedicated to the topic in the sources. This coming is heralded by a number of signs (ʿalāmāt). The universal signs are the widespread invasion of the earth by Evil, the overcoming of knowledge by ignorance, and the loss of a sense of the sacred and all that links man to God and his neighbors. These, in some measure, require the manifestation (ẓohur) and the rising (ḵoruj, qiām) of the Qāʾem, or else humanity will be overwhelmed by darkness. Furthermore, there are certain specific signs among which five recur more regularly and are hence justifiably called the “five signs”: (1) the coming of Sofyāni, the enemy of the Qāʾem, who will command an army in battle against the latter (Madelung, 1986, passim, and 2000); (2) the advent of Yamāni, who appears in the Yemen to preach support for the Qāʾem; (3) the Cry/Scream (ṣayḥa, nedāʾ ) of supernatural origin, coming from the sky and calling man to defend the Imam’s cause; (4) the swallowing (ḵasf) of an army composed of the Imam’s enemies in a desert often located between Mecca and Medina, according to a hadith most likely propagated by ʿAbd-Allāh b. Zobayr during his war propaganda against the Umayyad caliph Yazid (r. 680-83), during the latter’s campaign against Mecca and Medina, popularized by the traditionist of Basra, Qatāda (d. 773-74; see Madelung, 1981, pp. 293-95); and (5) the assassination by the Meccans of the messenger to the Qāʾem, often called Nafs or al-Nafs al-Zakiya (echoing the messianic rebellion and death in 762 of the Hasanid Moḥammad b. ʿAbd-Allāh, surnamed al-Nafs al-Zakiya).

The Mahdi thus becomes manifest, all the while having miraculously maintained his youth. He fights and definitively uproots Evil and pervasive ignorance, re-establishing the world to its original pure state (Amir-Moezzi, 2000, passim). For this to occur, he must first avenge the assassination of Imam Ḥosayn in order that the majority of Muslims be purged of the most villainous crime that it ever committed. Moreover, according to the eschatological doctrine of rajʿa (q.v.), a certain number of past saints, victims of their community’s injustice, and their persecutors come back to life in order that the good may take revenge on the evil ones. The Savior will thus not only re-establish Islam, but all religions, to their purity and original integrity, making “submission to God” (Ar. eslām) the universal religion. He will also bring wisdom to mankind by revealing the esoteric secrets of sacred Scriptures (Amir-Moezzi, 1992, pt. IV-3).

In this final battle against the forces of Evil, the Qāʾem is obviously not alone. First, he will be accompanied by certain important characters from the sacred history of humanity; thus, according to different hadiths one finds various prophets of the past such as Jesus and the Prophet Moḥammad, and various Imams, most often ʿAli and/or Ḥosayn. In this war, the Mahdi commands an army in which, apart from the masses of oppressed who enlist depending on the progress of his victories, three kinds of “warriors” are present: (1) angels, especially the 313 angels that accompanied the 313 fighters from Badr, the site of a battle of the Prophet against the Meccans; (2) a terrifying celestial entity named Fear (roʿb; see ESCHATOLOGY iii. IMAMI SHIʿISM) who marches at the head of the Mahdi’s army and terrifies his enemies; and (3) most importantly, 313 Companions of the Qāʾem forming his militia (jayš), a term whose letters also add up to the value of 313. These are specially initiated disciples bearing secret knowledge and possessing miraculous powers. The Savior will no doubt triumph, and the entire world will be brought to submission. Forces of injustice and ignorance will once and for all be exterminated, the earth embellished with justice and wisdom, and humanity revived by knowledge. The Mahdi thus prepares the world for the ultimate trial of the final resurrection of the Last Judgment. According to some traditions, he will reign upon the earth for some time (7, 9, 19 . . . years), after which occurs the death of all humanity just prior to the Judgment. Other traditions report that after the death of the Qāʾem, the government of the world will remain in the hands of the initiated for a certain period before the Day of Resurrection.

Influence and consequences.

Unlike in Sunnism, where belief in the Mahdi, although present, never became an essential article of faith, in Shiʿism in general, and Twelver Imamism in particular, it is made a constitutive dogma of its religious doctrine, its dualist vision of the world and more specifically, its conception of maʿād, “place of return” or the hereafter (see SHIʿITE DOCTRINE). During the course of time, Imami panegyric as well as hagiographic literature dedicated to the Hidden Imam tried hard to demonstrate that the figure of the Mahdi, present in Sunni hadith, referred to the twelfth Imam (Madelung, “al-Mahdī”). Imami arguments gained momentum during the 13th century when some great Sunni scholars contributed their support to the Imami dogma of identifying the Mahdi with the twelfth Imam: the two Syrian Shafiʿite scholars Moḥammad b. Yusof Ganji in his Bayān fi aḵbār ṣāḥeb al-zamān, composed in 1250-51, and Kamāl-al-Din Moḥammad ʿAdawi Naṣibini in his Maṭāleb al-soʾul, completed in 1252, and the renowned Sebṭ Ebn al-Jawzi (d. 1256) in his Taḏkerat al-ḵawāṣṣ (see bibliography). Given the dates of these authors and their works, coinciding with the arrival of the Mongols, the end of Sunni caliphal power and the increasing political influence of the Imamis, one wonders if this doctrinal reversal was not dictated by a certain opportunism. One might note in this respect that Moḥammad b. Yusof Ganji was assassinated in Damascus in 1260 for having collaborated with the Mongol conquerors. In any case, it is from this period onward that one notices, from time to time, some learned Sunnis rallying to Imami Mahdism. The phenomenon is also noticeable among Sunni mystics. Already in the 11th century, Abu Bakr Bayhaqi had denounced the consent of some Sufis concerning the identification of the Mahdi with the last Imam of the Twelvers (Madelung, “al-Mahdī”). Setting aside the influence of Imamism upon the eschatological hagiology of Ebn al-ʿArabi (q.v.; Elmore, pp. 111-40), one can cite the disciple of the latter, Saʿd-al-Din Ḥammuya in his Farāʾed al-semṭayn, the Egyptian ʿAbd-al-Wahhāb Šaʿrāni in al-Yawāqit wa’l-jawāher(1551) or, more recently, the Naqšbandi master from Balkh, Solaymān Qonduzi (d. 1877) in his Yanābiʾ al-mawadda (see bibliography). Finally, let us note that some doctrinal issues regarding the person of the twelfth Imam, his occultation, his final advent, his companions, and accounts of encounters with him have been interpreted in terms of spiritual and esoteric hermeneutics (taʾwil) in the Imami mystical schools and texts, particularly among the Šayḵis and Neʿmat-Allāhis (Amir-Moezzi 2001, 2003).

Bibliography:

Āḡā Bozorg, al-Ḏariʿa. J. Aguade, Messianismus zur Zeit der frühen Abbasiden: Das Kitāb al-Fitan des Nuʿaim b. Ḥammād, Tübingen, 1979.

Javad Ali, “Die beiden ersten Safire des Zwölften Imams,” Der Islam 25, 1939, pp. 197-227.

M. A. Amir-Moezzi, Le Guide divin dans le shi’isme originel, Paris, 1992; tr. David Streightas, The Divine Guide in Early Shi’ism, New York, 1994.

Idem, “Contribution à la typologie des rencontres avec l’imam caché (Aspects de l’imamologie duodécimaine II),” JA 284, 1996, pp. 109-35.

Idem, “Jamkarân et Mâhân: deux pèlerinages insolites en Iran,” in idem, ed., Lieux d’islam: cultes et cultures de l’Afrique à Java, Paris, 1997, pp. 154-67.

Idem, “Eschatology in Imami Shiʾism,” in EIr. VIII, 1998, pp. 575-81.

Idem, “Fin du Temps et Retour à l’Origine (Aspects de l’imamologie duodécimaine VI),” in M. Garcia Arenal, ed., Mahdisme et millénarisme en Islam, Revue des mondes musulmans et de la Méditerranée, 91-94, 2000, pp. 53-72.

Idem, “Une absence remplie de présences: herméneutiques de l’Occultation chez les Shaykhiyya (Aspects de l’imamologie duodécimaine VII),” BSOAS64, 2001, pp. 1-18; tr. in R. Brunner and W. Ende, eds., The Twelver Shia in Modern Times: Religious Culture and Political History, Leiden, 2001, pp. 38-57.

Idem, “Visions d’Imam en mystique duodécimaine moderne et contemporaine (Aspects de l’imamologie duodécimaine VIII),” in E. Chaumont et al., eds., Autour du regard: Mélanges Gimaret, Louvain, 2003, pp. 97-124.

S. A. Arjomand, “The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of the Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism: A Sociohistorical Perspective,” IJMES 28, 1966a, pp. 491-515.

Idem, “The Consolation of Theology: Absence of the Imam and Transition from Chiliasm to Law in Shi’ism,” The Journal of Religion 76, 1996b, pp. 548-71.

Saʿd b. ʿAbd-Allāh Ašʿari Qomi, Ketāb al-maqālāt wa’l-feraq, ed. M. J. Maškur, Tehran, 1963.

Abu Jaʿfar Barqi, Ketāb al-maḥāsen, ed. J. Moḥaddeṯ Ormavi, Tehran, 1950.

H. Corbin, “Au pays de l’imam caché,” Eranos Jahrbuch 32, 1963-64, pp. 31-87.

Idem, En Islam iranien. Aspects spirituels et philosophiques, Paris, 1971-72.

J. Darmesteter, Le Mahdi depuis les origines de l’Islam jusqu’à nos jours, Paris, 1885.

Ebn ʿAyyāš Jawhari, Moqtażab al-aṯar fi’l-naṣṣ ʿalā ʿadad al-aʾemmat al-eṯnā ʿašar, Tehran, 1927.

ʿAli b. Ḥosayn Ebn Bābuya [Bābawayh], al-Emāma wa’l-tabṣera men al-ḥayra, Qom, 1984.

Moḥammad b. ʿAli b. Ḥosayn (Shaikh Ṣaduq), al-Ḵeṣāl, ed. M.-B. Kamareʾi, Tehran, 1950.

Idem, ʿElal al-šarāʿeʾ, Najaf, 1966.

Idem, Kamāl al-din wa tamām al-neʿma, ed.ʿA.-A. Ḡaffāri, repr. Qom, 1985.

Ebn al-Nadim, Fehrest, ed. R. Tajaddod, Tehran, 1971.

Ebn Quluya [Qulawayh], Kāmel al-ziārāt, lithograph, Iran, n.d.

Ebn Saʿd, al-Ṭabaqāt al-kobrā, ed. E. Sachau, Leiden, 1904-17.

Ebn Ṭāwus, Kašf al-maḥajja, n.p. (Iran), 1931.

Idem, al-Malāḥem wa’l-fetan, Najaf, 1963.

G. Elmore, Islamic Sainthood in the Fullness of Time: Ibn al-ʿArabī’s Book of the Fabulous Gryphon, Leiden, 1999.

ʿA. Eqbāl, Ḵāndān-e Nowbaḵti, Tehran, 2nd ed., 1966.

Moḥammad b. Yusof Ganji, Bayān fi aḵbār ṣāḥeb al-zamān, ed. M.-H. Amini, Najaf, 1970.

Ṣāfi Golpāyegāni, Montaḵab al-aṯar fi’l-emām al-ṯāni ʿašar, Tehran, 1953.

ʿAbd-al-Karim Ḥāʾeri Yazdi, Elzām al-nāṣeb fi eṯbāt ḥojjat al-ḡāʾeb, Tehran, 1932.

H. Halm, “Die Sīrat Ibn Ḥaushab: Die ismailitische daʿwa im Jemen und die Fatimiden,” Die Welt des Orients 12, 1981, pp. 107-35.

Idem, Die Schia, Darmstadt, 1988.

Saʿd-al-Din Ḥammuya, Farāʾed al-semṭayn, Tehran, 2001.

J. M. Hussain, The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam: A Historical Background, London, 1981.

Moḥammad b. ʿAli Karājaki, al-Borhān ʿalā ṭul ʿomr ṣāḥeb al-zamān, in the margins of idem, Kanz al-fawāʾed, Tabriz, n.d. Kašši, Eḵtiār maʿrefat al-rejāl, Mašhad, 1970.

Ḵazzāz Rāzi, Kefāyat al-aṯar fi’l-naṣṣ ʿalu’l-aʾemmat al-eṯnā ʿašar, Tehran, 1888.

Ketāb Abu Saʿid al-ʿOṣfuri, Tehran, 1951.

V. Klemm, “Die vier sufarāʾ des Zwölften Imam. Zur formativen Periode der “Zwölferšīʿa,” Die Welt des Orients 15, 1984, pp. 126-43; Engl. tr. in E. Kohlberg, ed., Shīʿism, Aldershot, England, 2003, pt. VI.

E. Kohlberg, “From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ʿashariyya,” BSOAS 39, 1976, pp. 521-34; repr. in his Belief and Law in Imāmī Shīʿism, Aldershot, England, 1991, pt. XIV.

Idem “Al-Uṣul al-arbaʿumiʾa,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 10, 1987, pp. 128-66; reprint in his Belief and Law, pt. VII.

Idem, “Early Attestations of the Term ithnā ʿashariyya,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam24, 2000, pp. 343-55.

Moḥammad b. Yaʿqub Kolayni, al-Rawża men al-Kāfi,ed. H. Rasuli Maḥallāti, Tehran, 1969.

Idem, Oṣul men al-Kāfi, 4 vols., ed. J. Moṣṭafawi, Tehran, n.d.

W. Madelung, “ʿAbdallāh b. Zubayr and the Mahdī,” JNES 40, 1981, pp. 291-305.

Idem, “The Sufyānī between Tradition and History,” Stud. Isl. 43, 1986, pp. 5-48.

Idem, “Apocalyptic Prophecies in Ḥimṣ in the Umayyad Age,” Journal of Semitic Studies 31, 1987, pp. 141-85.

Idem, “Ḳāʾim Āl Muḥammad,” EI ² IV, 1978, pp. 456-57.

Idem, “Al-Mahdī,” EI ² V, 1978, pp. 1230-38.

Idem, “Abū’l-ʿAmayṭar the Sufyānī,” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 24, 2000, pp. 327-42.

Moḥammad-Bāqer Majlesi, Beḥār al-anwār, Tehran and Qom, 1956-72.

H. Modarressi Tabatabaʾi, Crisis and Consolidation in the Formative Period of Shiʾite Islam, Princeton, 1993.

E. Moeller, Beiträge zur Mahdilehre des Islams, Heidelberg, 1901.

Moḥammad b. Mo-ḥammad b. Noʿmān Mofid, al-Foṣul al-ʿašara fi’l-ḡayba, Najaf, 1951.

Najāši, Rejāl, Tehran, n.d.

Kamāl-al-Din Naṣibini, Maṭāleb al-soʾul, Tehran, 1870-71.

Ḥasan b. Musā Nowbaḵti, Feraq al-šiʿa, ed. H. Ritter, Istanbul, 1931.

Noʿaym b. Ḥammād, Ketāb al-fetan, ed. S. Zakkār, Beirut, 1993.

Ebn Abi Zaynab Noʿmāni, Ketāb al-ḡayba, ed. ʿA.-A. Ḡaffāri, Tehran, 1977.

Mirzā Ḥosayn Ṭabarsi/Ṭabresi Nuri, Jannat al-maʾwā, at the end of vol. 53 of al-Majlesi’s Beháār al-anwār. Al-Oṣul al-arbaʿomeʾa, University of Tehran, MS no. 962.

ʿAli b. Ebrāhim Qomi, Tafsir, ed. Musawi Jazāʾeri, Najaf, 1966-68.

Qonduzi, Yanābiʾ al-mawadda, Qom, 2000.

Ṣaffār Qomi, Baṣāʾer al-darajāt, ed. M. Kučebāḡi, Tabriz, 1960.

A. A. Sachedina, “A Treatise on the Occultation of the Twelfth Imamite Imam,” Stud. Isl. 68, 1978, pp. 109-24.

Idem, Islamic Messianism: the Idea of the Mahdi in Twelver Shiʿism, Albany, 1981.

ʿAbd-al-Wahhāb Šaʿrāni, al-Yawāqit wa’l-jawāher, Cairo, 1932.

Šarif Mortażā [Abu’l-Qāsem ʿAli b. Ḥosayn], Masʾala wajiza fi’l-ḡayba, in Nafāʾes al-maḵṭuṭāt, ed. Āl Yāsin, IV, Baghdad, 1955.

Idem, Tanzih al-anbiāʾ, Qom, n.d. Sebṭ Ebn al-Jawzi, Taḏkerat al-ḵawāṣṣ, Najaf, 1964.

Abu Jaʿfar Moḥammad (Šayḵ al-Ṭāʾefa) Ṭusi, Ketāb al-ḡayba, Najaf, 1965.

Idem, Fehrest kotob al-šiʿa, ed. Sprenger and ʿAbd-al-Ḥaqq, Mašhad, 1972, repr.

(Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi)

Statement of Aligarh Society of History and Archaeology [ASHA] On the Demise of Professor Arjun Dev

A man of vast knowledge and myriad of interests, Professor Arjun Dev would always be remembered most for his singular and remarkable two volume textbook on Story of Civilisation which he once wrote for the NCERT. Not only the students of Class XI and XII consulted them, but it was a must for all those who thought of preparing for the Civil Services. “Read Arjun Dev” was the sane advise given to anyone appearing for the public services! He along with Bipan Chandra, Satish Chandra, RS Sharma and Romila Thapar was a sure way to success. Even now, when the NCERT have withdrawn the books of these stalwarts, they are still read by any one preparing for the competition.

Prof. Arjun spent much of his life with the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) and wrote a number of extremely popular textbooks for the NCERT on Modern and Contemporary India and the World. One of the books, Story of Civilisation (in two parts) which was discontinued by the NCERT under the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) regime in 2002 was republished by Orient Blackswan as History of the World: From the Late 19th to the Early 20th Century and has remained a very widely read text.

After his retirement from the NCERT, Prof. Dev took up the work of the multi-volume Towards Freedom Project of the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR, New Delhi). It was a project conceived as a rejoinder to the British government-inspired Transfer of Power Volumes which documented the history of the last ten years of colonial rule in India in a manner that did scant justice to our great national liberation struggle. Started under the General Editorship of Prof. Sarvepalli Gopal, the first two volumes came out in 1997 and were published by the Oxford University Press. With the coming to power of the Vajpayee government, two volumes in the press were withdrawn and the project stalled. The project could be restarted only in 2005, and Prof. Arjun was the indefatigable coordinator of the project with Sabyasachi Bhattacharya as the General Editor.

As a person, Dev was a jovial and easy going man. When I first met him, I had expected a straight faced and sober Marxist scholar. What I discovered was a man of wit with a scientific temperament who was soft spoken and full of humour and wit. I can never forget his countenance with a cigarette dangling either from his lips or clutched between well smoked fingers and a cloth jhola tossed casually around his shoulder. His softness however would disappear if it was a question of ideology! He was a person who did not budge from his ideals and was thus a beacon of hope for the present lost generation.

Our heartfelt condolences to all the students of History and the bereaved family. May he rest in peace.

Professor Syed Ali Nadeem Rezavi

Professor Syed Jabir Raza

Professor Farhat Hasan

Professor Manvendra Kumar Pundhir

Dr Shivangini Tandon

Dr Amita Paliwal

Dr Syed Ali Kazim

Dr Enayatullah Khan

Ms Lubna Irfan