Founder of Fatimid Dynasty

[jamanpasand]

Ubayd Allah al-Mahdi Billah a.k.a Said ibn Husayn (909-934) is considered the founder of the Fatimid dynasty, the only major Shi'ite caliphate in Islam, and established Fatimid rule throughout much of North Africa.

Sa'id is probably a descendant of the Persian 'Abdullah ibn Maymun, the second founder of the Ismaili sect (the first being Imam Ismail himself). After establishing himself as the first Imam of the Fatimid dynasty he made claim to genealogic origins dating as far back as Fatimah, the daughter of the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, through Husayn, Fatimah's son, and Ismail. It was at this time as well that he changed his name to Ubaydallah Al-Mahdi. Muslim historians tend to be divided upon the veracity of Sa'id's genealogic claims. Of those who support his legitimacy, Ibn Al-Athir, Ibn Khaldun, and Al-Mirqazi are notable, while Ibn Khallikan, Ibn Idhari, Al-Suyuti and Ibn Taghri-Birdi can be considered to be among those who consider Sa'id an imposter. It should be noted, however, that the first claims disputing Sa'id's genealogic claims arose in 1011, when the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad issued a document signed by various Sunni and Shi'ite scholars, claiming that the dynasty, in fact, originated from Daysan the heretic rather than Fatimah bint Muhammad.

Sa'id began his conquest by establishing his headquarters at Salamyah and began riding towards north-western Africa, which at the time was under Aghlabid rule, following the propagandist success of his chief dai', Abu 'Abdullah Al-Husayn Al-Shi'i. Al-Shi'i, along with laying claim to being the precursor to the Mahdi, was instrumental in sowing the seeds of sedition among the Berber tribes of North Africa, specifically the Kutamah tribe.

It was Al-Shi'i's success which was the signal to Sa'id who set off from Salamyah disguised as a merchant. However, he was captured by the Aghlabid ruler Ziyadat-Allah and thrown into a dungeon in Sijilmasah. Al-Shi'i was then required to rescue Sa'id in 909 after which the Aghlabid dynasty, the last stronghold of Sunni Islam in North Africa, was expelled from region.

'Ubaydallah Al-Mahdi, as Sa'id was now to be known, established himself at the former Aghlabid residence at Raqqadah, a suburb of Al-Qayrawan in Tunisia. Two years after he achieved power, 'Ubaydallah had his missionary-commander Al-Shi'i executed. Since then his power only grew. At the time of his death he had extended his reign to Morrocco of the Idrisids, as well as Egypt itself. In 920, 'Ubaydallah took up residence at the newly established capital of the empire, Al-Mahdiyyah, which he founded on the Tunisian coast sixteen miles south-east of Al-Qayrawan, and which he named after himself.

After his death, 'Ubaydallah was succeeded by his son, Abu Al-Qasim Muhammad Al-Qaim, who continued his expansionist policy.

Any feedback?

[porus]

First, no reference is given. That is very suspicious.

Scholarly research indicates that the origins of the Fatimid Caliphate are shrouded in mystery because no contemporary records are readily available.

I suggest you read Chapter 3, "Early Ismailism", in excellent "The Ismailies" by Farhad Daftary. Until then, there is no need to waste time on this matter.

[jamanpasand]

Source
Wikipedia encyclopedia

[jamanpasand]

I suggest you read Chapter 3, "Early Ismailism", in excellent "The Ismailies" by Farhad Daftary. Until then, there is no need to waste time on this matter.

Daftary was a Ismaili historian. It is just like
an orthodox mumin writing syedna's biography!!!

Would you believe him and not waste time on that?

[Shahu]

Dear Jamanpasand,

If you can read Urdu there are two books by Dr. Zahid Ali (A Bohra) :

1. Tarikh Fatimin-e – Misr
2. Hamare Isma‘ili madhhab ki haqiqat awr us ka nizam

Shahu

[Agnostic]

Originally posted by jamanpasand:

Daftary was a Ismaili historian. It is just like
an orthodox mumin writing syedna's biography!!!

Would you believe him and not waste time on that?

Jamanpasand,

I have reluctantly concluded that your scholarly credentials are just about zero.

Stick to jaman. At least you can believe in that and not waste your time.

[jamanpasand]

I never claim on my scholarly credentials and I don’t mind taking a zero from a ignorant Agnostic fool like you. Infact I hate these agnostic and see no reason for them on this board. There are many agnostic boards and you can meet many like minded agnostic ignorant fools.

To my other friends, I know that Farhad Daftary and Mr.Zahid Ali have done great work in this area. But they are not free from bias and even their own research is self-contradicting like Imam Ismail dead before Imam Jaffer Sadiq( Daftary) ?????

[Agnostic]

Originally posted by jamanpasand:

To my other friends, I know that Farhad Daftary and Mr.Zahid Ali have done great work in this area. But they are not free from bias and even their own research is self-contradicting like Imam Ismail dead before Imam Jaffer Sadiq( Daftary) ?????

Upset, are we? I was being kind earlier. Truly, your scholarly credentials have descended into negative territory!

Never mind, next time you have your pasand-nu jaman, take an extra niwalo to ease your anger.

[jamanpasand]

Please see below the Genealogical tables and lists of the early Ismaili Imams. This important flow chart appears on page 551 of
Dr. Farhad Daftary's much acclaimed book THE ISMAILIS: their history and doctrines. published by Cambridge University Press in 1990. The Persian translation of this book has been awarded the
"Best Book of the Year Award" in Iran in 1996. Dr. Daftary is a world-renowned authority on Ismaili Studies. He is the Head of the Department of Academic Research & Publications at the Institute of Ismaili Studies in London, England. Dr. Daftary's above publication is available in most of the major public libraries of the world and is sold in the major Ismaili Jamaat Khanas (Prayer Houses), all over the world.

Dr. Daftary has spent several decades in completing this classical work of Ismaili history. Professor Wilferd Madelung of the University of Oxford has read the typescript of this book. In his Forward, the professor writes; "Dr. F. Daftary offers a first comprehensive and detailed synthesis of the complex history of Ismailism."

One can notice in the Genealogical flow chart, reproduced below, that the 5th Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq died in 148 Hijri/765 A.D. His son Ismail al-Mubarak had died in around 136 Hijri/754 A.D., that is to say nearly 11 years BEFORE the death of his father. To assert, after having known these dates, that Ismail who had died earlier than his father succeeded Ja'far al-Sadiq would be a folly of the highest degree.

[jamanpasand]

My Dear Friend Agnostic

You are an ignorant crank who does not know where you have come from and where you will go. Do you want addressed of agnostic sites? You will have good company there.

[porus]

Jamanpasand,

I thought this thread was about the origin of Ismailism leading to the founding Of the Fatimid Caliphate. But you have changed the subject into Daftary's authenticity. Daftary is not stating truth. His book is his opinion on the research he has carried out. Your only question should be whether his research meets with the rigorous standards acceptable to a top Western University. Islamic Universities are a joke when it comes to rigour.

You appear to be insinuating that just becase Daftary claims Ismail predeceased his father, then he must be wrong. Not so. The controversy regarding this issue has been raging for a thousand years and has also been discussed in various Muslim and Ismaili newsgroups. I think it has also been discussed on this very message board in the past.

If you read Daftary's book, you will see that the controversy gave rise to a number of sects. Every sect believes it follows the correct Imam. And that is "true". All Imams are "true" and valid. These are beliefs. And all beliefs are true to one who believes them, by definition. Otherwise he would not believe them, would he? But that does not mean it is "Truth", with capital T, which only God knows.

[jamanpasand]

porus
What a person can do when he tries to believe what is true. You have a case of belief before truth. I am thinking of truth before belief.

[porus]

Jamanpasand,

Let me clarify.

Belief is a statement about something which you have accepted as truth.

That makes belief and truth synonymous. They are the same thing.

eg You believe that earth is round. It is your belief. You also say that it is true that the earth is round. It is your truth. Neither are "Truth". For thousands of years mankind believed that the earth was flat. It was true forthem than the earth was flat. So belief and truth are the same. They change with time and space.

Also, your beliefs=truths are what filters your experience. If you saw people beating their breasts and shouting "Ya Husain", you will believe that they are engaged in maatam. You will not question it. A South American Indian, who does not know about it, will experience same event with a totally different belief.

Your beliefs=truths are represented by what NLP calls modalities in your mind and they affect your behaviour.

In so far as your life is governed by your beliefs and not by "Truth" or "Reality", you live in an illusion with Indian mystics have called "Maya".

"Truth" with capital T, is what mystics call al-Haq. This is not knowable through ordinary human faculties. Some mystics claim they have experienced it but they cannot put it in words.

[porus]

<u>Typo in the previous post</u>

In so far as your life is governed by your beliefs and not by "Truth" or "Reality", you live in an illusion, which the Indian mystics have called "Maya".

[kalim]

Dear jamanpasand: The story that Imam al-Mahdi was a descendant of Abdullah bin Maymun is a myth. It was invented as an anti-Ismaili propaganda. This myth has been refuted many times, and Vladimir Ivanov has written many papers on this as far back as the 1930s. If you (or anyone else) want I can send you electronic copy of these papers and book excerpts. Giving credence to a Wikipedia article really shows a very poor knowledge of sources. The Wikipedia article on Imam Hakim which someone posted was also full of nonsense. We should refrain from using Wikipedia for sensitive issues. It is not very reliable and is currently mired in scandal as everyone must already know.

First we have to realize that early history of Ismailis was written by their enemies. These, mostly Sunnis, wanted to portray the Ismaili doctrine as an attempt to blow up Islam from the inside. They spread ridiculous ideas like the Ismailis believed in the multiple gods, were atheists (talk about contradictions!) and did not follow the sharia. Imam Moiz in a letter to the chief da'i in Sind refuted this myth. This is a summary of what he said:

"In the conditions of secrecy and obscurity in which the concealed Imams had to live, there was much of vague and confusing talk while few facts were known for certain. The people knew that Imam Muhammad b. Ismail's successor was Abdullah and this Abdullah was easily turned into the notorious Abdullah b. Maymun al-Qaddah. This perversion of the true facts was further helped by the manner of referring to the concealed Imams under some appropriate pseudonyms: al-Maymun (the Divinely Blessed One), al-Qaddah (the mystical flint, spreading sparks of Divine wisdom) etc."

Later, Sayiddina Hamid al-din al-Kirmani has also refuted this myth in a epistle (al-Kafiya fi'r-radd...) he wrote to a subordinate da'i. There was strong religious aversion to reveal the names of the concealed Imams, to wit: "not to reveal what God has hidden". So even though the Fatimid Imams had the means and the power to construct their genealogies they never did it, believing that the concealed Imams were concealed by the will of God and hence some political inconvenience could be then tolerated.

All this is well summarized by the following statement by Ivanov:

"It is therefore clear that there is very little probability that Ibn al-Qaddah played any prominent part in launching of the Ismaili doctrine, and there is obviously no foundation whatever to regard him as the progenitor of the Fatimids."

So I suggest that you and others brush up on your histories by reading results of some genuine research rather than some fanciful stories concocted as anti-Ismaili propaganda. Daftary is a well known and honest scholar and one should not dismiss him simply because he is an Ismaili.

About the issue of Imam Ismail apparently predeceasing his father Imam Ja'far. This is often mentioned in dawaat sources like the Zahru'l-Ma'ani of Sayiddina Idris, the 19th da'i al-mutlaq. I once attended a series of sabaqs by the present Sayyidina's half-brother, Muhammad al-Baqir. He was discussing the nature of the Imamat as presented in early dawaat literature. This is what he had to say (I am writing from my sabaq notes):

"After Maulana Ali the Imamat can only pass from father to son, the only exception being Imam Hassan and Imam Hussain. Further, there can be only one Imam at a time. Imam Ismaili died during the lifetime of his father Imam Ja'far but not before appointing his own son Muhammad b-Ismail as the Imam. Hence, during the lifetime of Imam Ja'far the Imamat had passed onto Imam Muhammad. The Imamat does not flow backward: the actual Imam was in fact Imam Muhammad during the last years of Imam Ja'far's life."

In Zahru'l-Ma'ani Sayiddina Idris states that after the death of Imam Ismail Imam Ja'far appointed his (i.e. Ja'far's) son Musa b. Ja'far as the "veil" for Muhammad b. Ismail. Musa propagated the dawaat on the behalf of Muhammad b.Ismail.

I once had a conversation with a miyasaheb from the Yamani family (many of whom are private secretaries of the current and past dua'ts) about the Imamat. He told me that Musa b.Ja'far never claimed the Imamat for himself. He maintained silence on this issue, but the other Shia proclaimed among themselves that he was the successor of Imam Ja'far. He further told me that when he was a student in the Jamia he and his friends were sponsored to go on a trip to visit Musa b.Ja'far's tomb.

So it is completely possible that Imam Ismail did die before his father. Anyway, I encourage you to read more works of genuine scholars doing research in this field. Ivanov, Stern, Ayman Fu'ad Sayyid, Paul Walker, Abbas Hamdani, Ismail Poonawala etc. are some of them. In fact, mazoon saheb's daughter (Tahera Kutubudin) has published a book based on her Ph.D thesis on the poetry of Sayyidna Moayad Shirazi. Another of the mazoon saheb's daughter has written a master's thesis on Fatimid history. So even the bohra's are now getting interested in their heritage and are making an effort to popularize it.

[jamanpasand]

Dear Kalim

The Imamat does not flow backward: the actual Imam was in fact Imam Muhammad during the last years of Imam Ja'far's life."

That means Imam Jaffer was not an imam at the time of his death. Very interesting rather amusing.

Bohras also claim that Imam Jaffer falsely undertaken witness’s signature for Ismail's death. So on one hand they consider Imam infallible and at the same breath they made him telling a lie.

Reality is going in circles.

[Agnostic]

Jaman na-pasand,

Your scholarly reputation is heading ever more south day by day.

Kalim meant the next appointed Imam after Ismail was Muhammad. That is because Ismail, before he died, had appointed his son Muhammad to succeed him. If Ismailies accept Ismail predeceased his dad, and they do not, they cannot claim Ismail to have been Imam at all.

And this thing about getting signature for Ismail's death is a variation of the succession story. To save Ismail from being killed, Jafar is said to have faked his son's death to decieve his enemies. This is Jafar's taqiyya. This version does not believe Ismail died before Jafar. And is accepted as true by Ismailies.

There is also a third version. In this Ismail had an idenntical twin brother who had died. Jafar took this opportunity to mislead Ismail's enemies by pretending that the next Imam was dead.

I suggest you do not follow Kalim's advice. It might be beyond you.

[Alislam]

One important point to be considered here is that Imam Jaffer (AS) declared Ismail to be his successor, according to all the shias.

He died before his father or not is the discrepency.

Why would Imam Jaffer make Ismail as his successor if he is going to precede him in death?

If imam is considered as an infalliable and the imamat to be divine then Ismail would not had been declared as the next imam, in the first place?

[jamanpasand]

Agnostic

Better get english classes.

By the way have you looked foro Agnostic board. That would be a more appropriate forum for you.

[Agnostic]

Jam_and_pee_in_sand,

Thanks for advise. I took it and got English classes.

If you did not understand my post, you need to clear your guts. Too much jaman stuck in there. I suggest a heavy dose of Epsom Salt.

[jamanpasand]

Try your luck here. You may have some likeminded morons.

www.apatheticagnostic.com

[Muslim First]

.
Aga Khan's Dealings Stir Questions of Financial Transparency
.

[HUSAIN_HQ]

DEAR KALIM!

WOULD YOU FORWARD THOSE REFERENCES TO ME AT HUSAIN_HQ@YAHOO.COM