Some Thoughts and Comments on the Station of the Imams

 

The following two Comments were taken from an email exchange among those studying the relationship between Islam and the Baha'i Faith, and were in response to a question intended to clarify the "station of the Manifestation" from a Baha'i perspective -- addressing the Muslim understanding of the station of Muhammad and the Imams.  Some attention is also given to the question concerning the use of honorifics.

============================================

Again, my earlier comments [bottom] regarding the "first four caliphs" is taken directly from Moojan Momen’s explanation of the use of honorifics. This email is partly in response to ____ ‘s comments on Shi'ah distinctions of the Imams and the Bahá’í term "Manifestation of God." I would first like to quote from Momen and then say a few final words from my limited understanding of the "station" of the Imams, concluding that they are not, from a Bahá’í perspective, "Manifestations of God" -- a term developed by Baha’u’llah, and never applied to them, although their station appears to have been  exalted above the normal human being within the Islamic dispensation -- rather from my understanding that they are equal to such prophets of the house of Israel as are not regarded as Manifestations 'endowed with constancy.' (called Ulu al-'azm). Here is the section from Momen’s book on "Islam and the Bahá’í Faith, p. ix:

"It has also been customary to follow the names of the first four caliphs with the honorific ‘may Allah be pleased with him.’ It is, however, also considered permissible just to use one honorific on the first occasion of the mention of the Prophet’."

Greg

============================================

_____ wrote:

In a way, I think the honorifics are related to the issue of who are the true successors to the Prophet Muhammad and what is their station -- which can be a sensitive issue.

Yes, it is also my understanding that this can be a "sensitive" issue, since Muslims from Shi'ah and Sunni backgrounds differ with respect to their beliefs about the "station" of the Imams. I would like to elucidate those differences, from my limited understanding. I will then present my understanding of the Bahá’í view, which is also limited.

Distinctions between Sunni and Shi’ah Islam -- the Two Major Divisions within Islam: The cardinal point wherein the Shi'ahs (as well as the other sects included under the more general term of "Imamites") differ from the Sunnis is the doctrine of the Imamate. Sunnis believe that the visible head of the Islamic world is a matter to be determined by the choice and election of his followers. He is qualified for the lofty position by a combination of orthodoxy and administrative capacity. For Shi’ah’s the matter is altogether spiritual; an office conferred by God alone, first by His Prophet, and afterwards by those who so succeeded him (the Imams) -- having nothing to do with popular choice or approval.

The controversy between Sunnis and Shi’ahs stems from the belief among Shi’ahs that Imam Ali should have been the first head of Islam after Muhammad’s death, but was not the popular choice until after three other caliphs had already preceded him. Thus, He became Caliph (Khalif) but was always Imam, Shi’ahs hold. Ali was a cousin of the Prophet and His first disciple. Among the reasons given by those who did not want him to succeed Muhammad at the time of His death was that they considered him too young and without capacity.

The historical successors of Muhammad (Khalifs or Caliphs) were as follows (sorry for the mixture of A.D. and A.H. datings):
Abu-Bakri's-Siddiq-ibn-i-Abi-Quhafih, 632-34 A.D.
Umar-ibn-i'l-Khattab 634-44 A.D.
Uthman-ibn-i-'Affan, 644-56 A.D.
Ali-ibn-i-Abi-Talib, 656-61 A.D. (First Imam of Shi'ah. He and 11 other Imams assassinated)
Umayyad Caliphs, 661-749 A.D.
Abbasid Caliphs, 749-1258 A.D
Fatimite Caliphs, 1258-1517 A.D.
Ottoman Caliphs, 1517-19 A.D.

Here is the list of the first eleven Imams who were murdered:
1. Ali-ibn-i-Abi-Talib, the cousin & first disciple of the Prophet, assassinated (A.D. 661)
2. Hasan, son of Ali and Fatimih, poisoned (A.D. 670)
3. Husayn, son of Ali and Fatimih, killed at Karbila (Oct. 10, A.D. 680).
4. Ali, son of Husayn & Shahribanu (daughter of last Sasaniyan king), poisoned.
5. Muhammad-Baqir, son of the daughter of Imam Hasan, poisoned .
6. Ja'far-i-Sadiq, son of Imam Muhammad-Baqir, poisoned .
7. Musa-Kazim, son of Imam Ja'far-i-Sadiq, poisoned . (A.H. 183)
8. Ali-ibn-i-Musa'r-Rida, called Imam Rida, poisoned (A.H. 203)
9. Muhammad-Taqi, son of Imam Rida, poisoned (A.H. 220)
10. Ali-Naqi, son of Imam Muhammad-Taqi, poisoned (A.H. 254)
11. Hasan-i-'Askari, son of Imam Ali-Naqi, poisoned (A.H. 260)

You will notice that all the Imams were lineal descendents within Muhammad’s family. They were His relatives, descended from His young cousin Ali -- peace be upon Him. Momen explains that all the Imams are considered to have displayed this virtue of "mazlumiyyat" (which means "patient endurance of suffering caused by the tyrannical actions of those who have power over you") and, at each of their anniversaries in Shi’ah Islam, their lives are recounted emphasizing in particular the wrongs that they suffered at the hands of the Umayya and ‘Abbasid governments. There is a strange paradox in Shi’ah Islam in that two apparently contradictory attitudes are both equally praised and commended. The Imams are praised for their patient endurance of suffering at the hands of those with political power; they are commended for their use of taqiyya (religions dissimulation) in the face of overwhelming odds. And yet, the greatest Shi’ah hero the Imam Husayn, is praised and commended for not submitting to tyranny and rising up (qiyamat) and fighting even in the face of overwhelming odds and certainty of martyrdom. (Momen, ibid, p. 236)

As I understand it, all early Muslims lived under the Caliphs together and the divisions between Sunni and Shi’ah, as separate physical communities, occurred later. Hence, the respect for the Caliphs who held political power over all Muslims existed within all Muslims until the time of Ali, and is perhaps the reason the honorific is used by all Muslims to respect the first four Caliphs. Remember that the "first four" Caliphs would include Ali (as a Caliph) and that Ali respected Abu-Bakri who took the place that Shi’ahs say was meant for him (Ali); i.e., as first successor. The ideological and theological separation between Sunni and Shi’ah today is apparently less than their geographical separation. Momen (in "Introduction to Shi’ah Islam") states that it would be "unfortunate" if [his] reader[s] formed the impression that the two [Sunni and Shi’ah] communities are a long way apart in their view of Islam," since, "in fact, the two are much closer to each other than many Christian sects." Today, Shi’ahs are the next largest group after the Sunnis in the Muslim world and are the largest religious community in several countries: Iran, Iraq, Bahrain and Lebanon.

============================================

Now we come to the point _____ made about the reverence for the Imams beyond that given to the Caliphs. This is clearly a Shi’ah view, though it is one clearly supported by the Bahá’í teachings.

COMMENT and QUESTION:  "I think believers are expected to make distinction between the station of the Prophet Muhammad and the Imams (Manifestations of God) as separate from everyone else.  According to the Baha'i writings the Imams were the true successors to Muhammad.  Are they also to be regarded as ‘Manifestations of God.’?"  

ANSWER:  Yes, I would agree that the Prophet Muhammad and the Imams are reverenced above the rest of humanity, but the Bahá’í view also distinguishes the "station" of the Imams from that of Muhammad.  It is my understanding that the Bahá’í teachings do not regard the Imams as "Manifestations of God" – a title developed by Baha’u’llah, which is reserved only for those "prophets endowed with constancy." (Bahá’í references below.) Yes, they are regarded as prophets, but of a different class than that of Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. The Bahá’í teachings distinguish two classes of prophets as does Islam. Momen, in his book on "Shi’ah Islam" writes: "Certain of the more important prophets are called Ulu al-'azm, prophets endowed with constancy. These are those prophets that brought a book and a new religious law and in the Qur'an they are also called rusul, apostles (from God). Among those recognized to be such prophets are Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, until in the succession of the prophets, Muhammad is reached . . . ." The major prophets are universal and thus "Muhammad is not considered to be just a prophet for the Arabs or for the limited area in which he lived, but a prophet with teachings from God for the whole world." (Momen, Introduction to Shiih Islam, p. 177)

One explanation from the Bahá’í teachings denotes the two types as follows: [There are two classes of prophets] "One are the independent Prophets Who are followed; the other kind are not independent and are themselves followers. . . The independent Prophets are the lawgivers and the founders of a new cycle. They are like the sun which is luminous in itself: the light is its essential necessity; it does not receive light from any other star. . . . The other Prophets are followers and promoters, for they are branches and not independent; they receive the bounty of the independent Prophets, and they profit by the light of the Guidance of the universal Prophets. They are like the moon, which is not luminous and radiant in itself, but receives its light from the sun. The Manifestations of universal Prophethood Who appeared independently are, for example, Abraham, Moses, Christ, Muhammad, the Bab and Baha'u'llah. But the others who are followers and promoters are like Solomon, David, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.... (from the teachings of 'Abdu'l-Bahá, full text can be found in "Some Answered Questions," p. 164)

Thus, the Imams are considered dependent prophets (in relation to Muhammad), not equal in rank to the independent Prophets "endowed with constancy." Mulla Fatth-i-Kashani, who is one of the highly respected Shi'ah scholars, in his commentary on Manhaj-ul-Sadegheen, addresses the concept of Khatam'u-Nabieen (Seal of the prophets) with a story that may shed some light on the station of the Imams. Mulla Fatth-i- Kashani, recounts a tradition attributed to Muhammad: Muhammad the Messenger of God tells Ali, Peace be upon Him!: "If it was allowed that after me there be another prophet (nabi), that would have been you, and no one but you." -- hence the new distinction with the title "Imam." Moreover, the term "Rasool" (Messenger or Apostle) was abandoned after Muhammad. [A full discussion of this can be found in Kamran Hakim’s paper "Six Lessons on the Seal" published here on this Bahá’í / Islamic web site (in the FILES section see http://watsongregory.homestead.com/files/Seal_of_the_Prophets_by_Hakim.html  ).]

Kamran Hakim writes (same URL as above): "If you pay attention to what happened after the passing of Prophet Muhammad you will see that those claiming successorship were known as Khalifs (per Sunni terminology) or Imams --Who were Khalifat'u'llah- (per Shi'ah belief). These successors were not called ‘prophets’. Additionally, the Revelators Who are to appear after Muhammad per directive of the verse of the Qur'an: ‘O children of Adam [i.e. Muslims. KH], verily apostles from among you shall come unto you, who shall expound my signs unto you: whosoever therefore shall fear God and amend, there shall come no fear on them, neither shall they be grieved.’ [Qur'an 7:35] must not be designated or identified as ‘Prophet’. As a result [likewise], those Who succeeded Baha'u'llah are not called Prophets. 'Abdu'l-Baha is known as the Center of Baha'u'llah's Covenant and His grandson was designated as the Guardian of the Baha'i Faith."

Interestingly, when 'Abdu'l-Baha visited in America in 1912 and spoke at Stanford University the headlines in the Palo Alto Times stated: "Prophet says He is not a Prophet." References in the Bahá’í writings to Abdu’l-Baha (son of Baha’u’llah and the authorized Interpreter of His Revelation) utilize the pronouns "He and His" in capital form as an honorific for Him, but this does not mean Bahá’í regard Him as a "Manifestation of God." Both the Guardian (Shoghi Effendi, 1897-1957) and The Universal House of Justice use this capital pronoun convention as a form of respect for Abdu’l-Baha. Thus, the use of an honorific does not necessarily imply anything beyond His designated station.  It may serve mainly as a sign of respect.  His station as the Center of the Covenant is certainly unique in religious history, though the reference to His position as the "moon" in the orb of Baha'u'llah's revelation would certainly seem to place Him also in the station of a minor Prophet -- as per His own explanation using these metaphors of "sun" and "moon" with respect to the independent (major) and dependent (minor) Prophets.  (Again, see Some Answered Questions, p. 164, on the "Two Classes of Prophets.")

"The Most Great Infallibility mentioned by Bahá'u'lláh is inherent in the Manifestation of God and no one can share in it.[10]  'Abdu'l-Bahá did not possess this but Bahá'u'lláh conferred infallibility upon Him. The Manifestation of God is like a sun which generates its own heat and light; the moon does not possess its own light but receives it from the sun and reflects it towards the earth.  Similarly, Bahá'u'lláh acts as the Sun of Truth and 'Abdu'l-Bahá as the Moon of this Dispensation. [10 See Taherzadeh, Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, vol. 4, pp. 143, 149-53.]  (Adib Taherzadeh, The Child of the Covenant, p. 4)

"He is... the Moon of the Central Orb of this most holy Dispensation -- styles and titles that are implicit and find their truest, their highest and fairest expression in the magic name 'Abdu'l-Bahá."  (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 133)

"If Bahá'u'lláh shone like the sun, and the Master gently went on radiating His light, like the moon, Shoghi Effendi is an entirely different phenomenon, as different as an object hurtling towards its goal is from something stationary and radiating."  (Ruhiyyih Khanum, The Priceless Pearl, p. 82)

With respect to the station of the "minor" prophet,  it is interesting to note the following statement from The Guardian, Shoghi Effendi: "In confirmation of the exalted rank of the true believer, referred to by Baha'u'llah, He reveals the following: ‘The station which he who hath truly recognized this Revelation will attain is the same as the one ordained for such prophets of the house of Israel as are not regarded as Manifestations endowed with constancy.'" [emphasis mine. Italicized section originally in quotes] (Shoghi Effendi, The World Order of Baha'u'llah, p. 111)

Momen in his explanation on the "Seal of the Prophets" (khatam an-nabiyyin) writes to Muslims in his book "Islam and the Bahá’í Faith" (p. 58):

"Finally, it is necessary to say one more thing about these two words ‘Messenger’ (rasul) and ‘prophet’ (nabi). In what I have written above, I have tried to explain matters from the viewpoint of Muslims and so I have used these two words frequently in explaining the claims of Baha’u’llah. It should be noted, however, that Baha’u’llah himself never uses either of these two words in describing his own claim. He claims to be neither prophet (nabi) nor Messenger (rasul). Instead, he introduces a new term to describe his own station and that of the other Messengers of Allah such as Muhammad, Jesus, and Moses. He refers to these founders of the major world religions as ‘Manifestations of Allah’ (zhur Allah). One purpose in using a new word is to distinguish the Bahá’í teaching from that of other religions. Whereas Christians claim that Jesus is God and Muslims believe that Muhammad was essentially just a human being chosen by Allah, the Bahá’í teaching is that these founders of the world religions occupy a station that is intermediate between Allah and humanity. This intermediate station has aspects of both the human and the divine. Outwardly, the Manifestations appear to be human beings, subject to the same bodily limitations and needs as other human beings, such that Muhammad says in the Qur’an: ‘I am but a man like yourselves’ (18:110). Yet inwardly, they manifest perfectly all of the names and attributes of Allah, such that they become the perfect embodiments of all virtues and it is for this reason that both Muhammad and Abraham are stated in the Qur’an to be an ‘excellent example’ for human beings to follow (33:21, 60:4)."

It is interesting to note that this "intermediary function" is also reflected in the Bible, in numerous passages, as a designation for Christ. Christ Is The Mediator Between God And Man (the Intermediary). Here are just a few:

"For there is one God; there is also one mediator between God and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human. . ." (1 Timothy 2:5) "Now a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one." (Galatians 3:20) "But Jesus has now obtained a more excellent ministry, and to that degree he is the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted through better promises." (Hebrews 8:6) Jesus said to him, "I am the way [intermediary], the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." (John 14:6) A more full explanation of the divergent statements of Christ, and on the "station of the Manifestation" can be found on my web site at http://www.homestead.com/watsongregory/files/station.htm

I will conclude with this statement about the station of the "Manifestation of God" from Baha’u’llah: "O Salman! The door of the knowledge of the Ancient Being hath ever been, and will continue for ever to be, closed in the face of men. No man's understanding shall ever gain access unto His holy court. As a token of His mercy, however, and as a proof of His loving-kindness, He hath manifested unto men the Day Stars of His divine guidance, the Symbols of His divine unity, and hath ordained the knowledge of these sanctified Beings to be identical with the knowledge of His own Self. Whoso recognizeth them hath recognized God. Whoso hearkeneth to their call, hath hearkened to the Voice of God, and whoso testifieth to the truth of their Revelation, hath testified to the truth of God Himself. Whoso turneth away from them, hath turned away from God, and whoso disbelieveth in them, hath disbelieved in God. Every one of them is the Way of God that connecteth this world with the realms above, and the Standard of His Truth unto every one in the kingdoms of earth and heaven. They are the Manifestations of God amidst men, the evidences of His Truth, and the signs of His glory."(Baha'u'llah, Gleanings from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, p. 49)

My earlier comments were developed directly from Moojan Momen’s explanation of the use of honorifics. His context was mainly with reference to these three: "Muhammad, peace be upon him" or "may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him" and the honorific "may Allah be pleased with him" which is commonly used with first four caliphs.