Ismaili Dictionary & Encyclopedia

Hachar (Hatya)Encyclopedia Topic

Murder, kilting

Various Sources HadEncyclopedia Topic

Bone

Various Sources HaDDNoun

La limite, le degré, (pluriel = Hodud.)

Heritage Dictionary of Ismailism, entry #43general HADI BIN AL-NIZAR (490-530/1097-1136), 20TH IMAMEncyclopedia Topic

"Abu Ali Hasan, or Ali, surnamed al-Hadi was born in Cairo in 470/1076. He was about 17 years old on the eve of the death of Imam al-Mustansir, and 20 years during assumption of Imamate in 490/1097. Henceforward, the seat of Imamate transferred from Egypt to Iran owing to the bifurcation among the Ismailis, where Hasan bin Sabbah had founded the Nizarid Ismaili state in the fortress of Alamut.

Imam al-Nizar is reported to have killed in Cairo most probably in 490/1097 in imprisonment. After his death, there appeared no Nizari Ismailis opposition in Egypt. Certain influences of the Nizari Ismailis however have been known in Egypt, whom according to Tarikh-i Misr by Ibn Muyassar, Hasan bin Sabbah is said to have sent material aids in 518/1123-4. It is reported that al-Afdal closed the Dar al-Hikmah where he found many professions supporting the cause of Imam al-Nizar.

Hafiz Abru (d. 833/1430) writes in his Majma al-Tawarikh-i Sultaniyya (p. 242) that, "Only one of al-Nizar's sons was arrested with him, and the other son disappeared in Alexandria, who was neither arrested nor recognized." This seems an erroneous account, as the arrested sons were Abu Abdullah al-Hasan and Abu Abdullah al-Hussain, who were prominent faces in the Fatimid court. The third son under shadow was Ali al-Hadi, who had managed to escape from Alexandria.

Ibn Zafir (d. 613/1216) writes in Akhbar ad-Dawla al-Munqatia (pp. 97-111) that the two sons of Imam al-Nizar rebelled in turn after escaping from prison. Abu Abdullah al-Hasan rebelled against al-Hafiz (524-544/1131-1149) in 528/1133, while Abu Abdullah al-Hussain rose against al-Adid (555-567/1160-1171) in 557/1161, assuming the title of al-Muntasir billah. These rebellions ultimately were suppressed because of mustering handful supporters, but it most possibly forced the Fatimid authority to focus their attention upon the handful followers of Imam al-Nizar in Egypt, resulting Imam al-Nizar's third son, al-Hadi to escape from their investigation.

It appears from the historical report that Imam al-Nizar had managed to send away his son and successor al-Hadi in Maghrib before his submission through his most confident follower, named Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi. It is almost certain that they boarded a vessel from Alexandria for Meila, and after crossing Mount Bouiblan and Muluya river, they reached Rissani, near Erfoud and stayed in the house of Imam al-Nizar's aunt in Sijilmasa. Ali bin Yousuf (480-500/1087-1106), the Almoravid ruler had captured Sijilmasa in 450/1056 and dominated it when Imam al-Hadi had been there.

The narrative of Kitab al-Akhbar wa'l Athar by Muhammad Abu'l Makrem is absolutely inaccurate and far from the truth. It recounts that the escaping Imam from Alexandria was Imam al-Nizar himself, who came in Sijilmasa, and then made his way to the castle of Alamut. It is most probably spurious, as it does not occur in any well-established sources. Ibn Khallikan, Ibn Athir, Ibn Khaldun and Makrizi are the accredited authorities on Fatimid history, and they also admit that Imam al-Nizar was taken prisoner to Cairo, and was killed in the prison. De Lacy O'Leary had investigated the primary sources and writes in The Short History of the Fatimid Khilafat (London, 1923, p. 212) that, "Nizar's subsequent life is totally unknown. He was either imprisoned in absolute secrecy, or put to death: stories were told of both these ends, but nothing was ever known for certain." It seems that the entire matter was over in the beginning of 489/1096, because al-Musta'li had intimated the whole story to the governors of his realm through a letter dated 8th Safar, 489/February, 1096.

Granted for a while that Imam al-Nizar had escaped from Alexandria, then it is possible that al-Afdal had not returned to Cairo and had made an intensive search. Besides, Imam's most confident supporter, Iftigin also accompanied him, had Imam al-Nizar made his secret way out of Alexandria. It is therefore, not possible to value the doubtful version of Muhammad Abu'l Makrem.

The Nizari Ismaili influence also penetrated in the Maghrib, and we are told that some of the followers of Imam al-Nizar in Berber tribe had engineered revolts against the later Fatimid rulers from their base in the Maghrib, which was not in the Fatimid control since 442/1050.

It seems probable that Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi had moved from Sijilmasa with Imam al-Hadi after the death of al-Musta'li in 495/1095. After a long and tedious journey, they alighted in the vicinity of Rudhbar, the chief city of Daylam in Iran after crossing the ranges of Mount Taliqan. Since Alamut was immured and stormed by the Seljuqs at that time, Imam al-Hadi had to conceal himself either in the villages of Rudhbar, or in some remote place. He was taken to the vicinity of Alamut after restoration of peace, which was only known to Hasan bin Sabbah and none else. He caused Imam's dwelling in a village at the foot of Alamut. Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi is said to have stayed about six months, and then he returned to Egypt. Imam al-Hadi finally made his footing in the castle of Lamasar after the death of Hasan bin Sabbah in 518/1124.

The period under review denotes the second dawr-i satr of the Ismaili history (490-559/1097-1164), wherein three Imams lived in concealment during about 70 years, viz. Imam al-Hadi, Imam al-Mohtadi and Imam al-Kahir. During the period of satr, the Ismaili hujjats governed the Nizari state, viz. Hasan bin Sabbah, Kiya Buzrug Ummid and Muhammad bin Kiya.

The tradition widely famous about Imam al-Hadi's arrival in Iran consists of very meager details, which is cited in the later sources, namely Dabistan al-Mazahib (comp. in 1653), Janat al-Amal (comp. in 1886), Athar-i Muhammadi (comp. in 1893) etc. It reads: - "It is recounted by the Ismailis of Rudhbar and Kohistan that during the time of Hasan bin Sabbah, Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi, one of the confident persons, came in Alamut and brought a son of al-Nizar bin al-Mustansir, who was a legitimate Imam. Nobody except Hasan bin Sabbah knew about this secrecy. Hasan bin Sabbah treated Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi with honour and consideration and caused the Imam to dwell in a village at the foot of Alamut. Abu'l Hasan as-Sa'idi was allowed to return back after six months. Imam remained engaged in divine worship in seclusion, and then betrothed to a woman in that village, who bore a son, named al-Mohtadi."

It ensues that the story of about 10 years has been summed up in the above one tradition. Imam al-Hadi was brought from Maghrib through the routes of Egypt, while the tradition simply indicates his arrival from Egypt to Iran. Secondly, it admits that this tradition was widely known among the Ismailis of Rudhbar and Kohistan, which must have been famous possibly long after the departure of Imam al-Hadi from those places. Thirdly, Hasan bin Sabbah caused the living of Imam al-Hadi at the foot of Alamut, which was only known to him, gives further clue to understand that the existence of the Imam around Alamut was also kept secret. Fourthly, it speaks Imam's marriage in that village and the birth of his son. It transpires that Imam al-Hadi would have been in the village till 500/1106 when his son al-Mohtadi was born. Fifthly, Ata Malik Juvaini (p. 682) has quoted the last will of Hasan bin Sabbah, whose concluding lines run: - "And he charged, until such time as the Imam came to take possession of his kingdom." It further indicates that Imam al-Hadi was yet in the vicinity of Alamut when Hasan bin Sabbah died in 518/1124. These narratives seem to show that Imam al-Hadi had come in the castle after 518/1124. He must have inspected the administrative fabric and the Ismaili mission from Kiya Buzrug, and then had gone to live in the castle of Lamasar most probably after 526/1132.

Another less reliable story relates that the Imam that was brought from Egypt to Alamut was al-Mohtadi, the grandson of Imam al-Nizar. This story seems to have been prevalent in the orbits, who believed that Imam al-Nizar had only two sons and were imprisoned with him. It has been heretofore discussed that the whereabouts of Imam al-Hadi had not been exposed in Cairo, and instead, the two other sons of Imam al-Nizar were made familiar figures. These sons had been also taken prisoners in Alexandria, which was enough for their opponents to cultivate a report that "all the sons of al-Nizar" were arrested. The age of Imam al-Hadi was about 16-17 years during the ascension of Imam al-Nizar, and those who definitely knew him, had spoken of him as the minor son of Imam al-Nizar, which was a term continued to be employed for Imam al-Hadi till his arrival in Alamut after 518/1124 when he was about 50 years old. On that juncture, the scholars seem to have drawn an opinion that the arriving minor son of Imam al-Nizar in Alamut should have been the son of Imam al-Hadi, who was also 17-18 years old at that time. The theory of minor son thus became specific for Imam al-Mohtadi, making him born in Egypt too. There is probably much truth in the traditional view, according to which the marriage of Imam al-Hadi was actualized in the village at the foot of Alamut, and his son al-Mohtadi was the first Nizari Imam to be born in Iran, and therefore, the assumption purporting the arrival of Imam al-Mohtadi seems doubtful and indecipherable.

The major part of the life of Imam al-Hadi passed in the shadow of the striking personalities of Hasan bin Sabbah and Kiya Buzrug Ummid. Abu Muhammad al-Iraqi in his al-Firaq (Ms. 791 in the library of Sulemaniyya mosque, Istanbul) compiled soon after the fall of Alamut in 654/1256, and Zakariya Qazwini (1203-1283) in Athar al-Bilad wa-Akhbar al-Ibad (comp. in 661/1263) admit the very presence of Imam al-Hadi in Alamut. The Egyptian historian Ibn Muyassar (1231-1278) writes in Tarikh-i Misr (p. 68) that, "Hasan bin Sabbah introduced an Imam to his successors during his death-bed."

Imam al-Hadi continued to guide his followers in the religious matters through Kiya Buzrug from Lamasar without making public appearance. The fragments of the traditions inform nothing for him. It is however sparsely recorded that there had been an open ground inside the castle of Lamasar, where he used to take interest in horse riding and horse breeding. It is also said that Imam al-Hadi used to visit several times in the vicinity of Lamasar at night in seclusion and distributed foods and clothes to the poor villagers.

Imam al-Hadi died in 530/1136 at the age of 60 years, after bequeathing the office of the Imamate to his son, al-Mohtadi, when Kiya Buzrug was governing the Ismaili state in Alamut.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITHEncyclopedia Topic

The word hadith (pl. ahadith), occurring 23 times in the Koran, is a noun formed from the verb hadatha means to be new. The Hebrew hadash carries the same meaning. From this followed the use of the term for a piece of news, tale, story or a report. The story tellers were also called hudath. The Muslims since the very lifetime of the Prophet called the report with regard to his sayings as the hadith.

The Prophet of Islam was not only the transmitter of the Koran, but he also interpreted it. The only difference between the ordinary expressions of the Prophet and his revelations consists in the fact that the former are Divine in content alone, the latter are Divine in form as well. The ground for the view is afforded by the Koran: "And We have revealed you the exhortation (i.e., the Koran) in order that you may explain to men what has been revealed to them" (16:46).

The word sunnah means way, custom, habit of life and technically, it is defined as the utterances of the Prophet other than the Koran, known as hadiths, or his personal acts and acts of sayings of others tacitly approved by him. Sunnah has also another technical meaning in reference to religious duties, namely, that which is recommended, although not obligatory, according to the classification of the Shariah values. The term hadith conveys not only the sayings of the Prophet, but also his actions as well as what he tolerated among his Companions. By toleration we mean the seeing by the Prophet of a thing being done by a Companion and keeping silent over the deed or even explicitly approving it. The two words, hadith and sunnah, either of which might with some justification be translated "tradition" though used commonly, differ in their significance. Hadith really means a report representing an account of what happened, whereas Sunnah means a practice or custom. In short, the Sunnah is what was practiced. Since Sunnah means the practices and precepts of the Prophet, and hadith tells what was the Sunnah, the latter enshrines the Sunnah.

The Koran says, "And We have revealed you the exhortation (i.e., the Koran) in order that you may explain to men what has been revealed to them" (16:46). It means that to the Prophet alone was the solution known and the knowledge he communicated to his followers is pretty clear from his saying or doing. Thus, a number of his sayings were marshaled to explain the Koranic verse. He unfolded the meaning and communicated to his Companions. It was from his mouth that they learnt the meaning of the Koranic verses. The Companions handed down by words of mouth to their followers, the tab'in, who in their turn passed it to their followers, the taba tab'in. In the meantime, the art of writing became common and the compilers henceforth collected the sayings of the Prophet related by the Companions.

It was laid down that the narrator of a tradition must also repeat its isnad or chain of authorities, as : "I heard from such one, who heard from such one," and so on, until the chain reached the Prophet himself. Each person in this isnad must have been well known for his good character and retentive memory.

Many scholars from various angles prepared numerous collections of the hadiths, and different methods were followed in the arrangement of the material. Two models were mainly adopted. In the first category, hadith traced to each Companion was put together under his name, no matter what their theme might be. Such a collection is called masnad, therefore, the titles of the chapters are Masnad of Abu Huraira, Masnad of Anas bin Malik, etc. The most famous compilation in this category is Masnad of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal. It contains 40,000 hadiths, of which 10,000 have occurred more than once. The second category of hadiths is the grouping into chapters and sub-chapters according to their themes. For instance, we find chapters on purity, prayers, fasting, zakat, hajj, marriage, so on. The best known work of this type is al-Muwwatta of Imam Malik, which contains 1720 hadiths. Another compiler of this category is al-Musannaf of Abdul Razak al-Sanani, which has been published in eleven volumes, containing 11,033 hadiths. The compilers introduced each hadith with its own isnad, which means the series of authorities, who may be called narrators or transmitters or muhaddis.

The early authorities of hadiths, who scrutinized each hadith, both the text and its series, included in their compilations only those, which they believe to be genuine, and rejected those which they suspected as fabricated. The authorities on hadiths said that the text should have no conflict with the Koran. The series (isnad) of authorities should be unbroken and each narrator mentioned in it must be known for his knowledge, piety and memory. Upon the beginning of the 3rd century of Islam, compilation of hadiths did not discriminate between authentic hadiths and other lesser than authentic, so the hadiths were mixed up. Muhammad bin Ismail al-Bukhari was the first to conceive the idea of compiling the authentic hadiths, and called his collection as Sahih.

The first books of Sunni hadith arranged according to the chapters of law for easy reference appeared in the ninth century. The six such books accepted by the Sunnis are as under:-

1. al-Sahih by Bukhari (d. 256/870), collected 600,000 but selected 2762 hadiths.

2. al-Sahih by al-Muslim (d. 261/815), collected 300,000 but selected 4348 hadiths.

3. al-Sunan by Ibn Majah (d. 273/886), collected 400,000 but selected 4000 hadiths.

4. al-Sunan by Abu Daud (d. 275/889), collected 500,000 but selected 4800 hadiths.

5. al-Jami al-Sahih by Tirmizi (d. 279/892), collected 300,000 but selected 3115 hadiths.

6. al-Sunan by Nisai (d. 303/915), collected 200,000 but selected 4321 hadiths.

It means that 2300,000 hadiths were collected altogether, but selection was made for 23346 hadiths. The Sunnis call their above six collections as Sihah as-Sittah or al-Kutub al-Sittah (the six books).

There are four early collections of the hadith among the Shi'ites, compiled by the following three authors, known as the Three Muhammads.

1. Al-Kafi fi Ilm al-Din by Muhammad al-Kulaini (d. 328/939)

2. Man la Yahduruhu al-Faqih by Muhammad ibn Babuya (d. 381/991)

3. Tahdhib al-Ahkam by Muhammad Abu Jafar at-Tusi (d. 460/1067)

4. Al-Istibsar by the same author.

The Shi'ites call the above four collections as al-Usul al-Arba'h or al-Kutub al-Arba'h (the four books)

In addition, there are three other books belonging to more modern times and are highly regarded in this field. Their authors have also been named as a modern Three Muhammads:-

1. Al-Wafi by Muhammad bin Murtada, known as Mulla Muhsin-i Fayd (d. 1091/1680)

2. Wasa'il ash-Shi'a by Muhammad bin Hasan, known as al-Hurr al-Amili (d. 1104/1692)

3. Bihar al-Anwar by Muhammad Bakir Majlisi (d. 1110/1699)

Even more modern is the collection Mustadrak al-Wasa'il (The rectification of al-Wasa'il) by Hussain an-Nuri at-Tabarsi (d. 1320/1902).

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-AMAN AL-UMMAHEncyclopedia Topic

The word aman al-ummah means the security of the ummah. The Prophet is reported to have said: "Just as the stars are a means of securing (aman) the people of the earth against drowning, my Ahl al-Bayt is a means of securing my ummah from division" (Mustadrak, 3:149 etc.). In this context, according to ar-Risala fi l-Imama (comp. 408/1017) by Abul Fawaris Ahmad ibn Yaqub, Imam al-Muizz said in a speech he delivered on the day of fast-breaking in Cairo that, "O people, God has chosen a Messenger and Imams. He has made them superior and favoured them. He has accepted them as the guides to His creatures. He sent down His revelation upon them, and made them speak with His wisdom. They are like luminous stars : if one of them sets, another one shining, glittering and fully radiant will illuminate."

HADITH-I DAWAT AL-ASHIRA [ see HADITH AL-YAUM AL-DAR ]

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-HAQQEncyclopedia Topic

The famous hadith states, "Ali is always with the Truth and the Truth is always with him." This tradition has been transmitted through fifteen channels. Under the commentary of al-Bismillah, Fakhruddin Razi quotes the Prophet as saying in Tafsir-i Kabir that, "And the truth turns with him (Ali) wherever way he turns" (wa dara al-haqq ma'ahu haithu dar)

HADITH-I KISA [ see AYAT AL-TATHIR ]

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-KUDSIEncyclopedia Topic

Hadith al-Kudsi means the sacred tradition. It is also called Hadith Ilahi or Hadith Rabbani (divine tradition). It is a class of traditions which gives words spoken by God, as distinguished from Hadith Nabawi (prophetic tradition) which gives the words of the Prophet. Hadith al-Kudsi is a report or saying transmitted by the Prophet which God speaks in the first person. These reports do not form part of the Koran. It also does not necessarily come through Jibrail, but may have come through inspiration (ilham) or in dream (ru'ya). Hadith al-Kudsi does not form a separate group in the books of tradition, but some collections have been compiled from others. The largest collection, al-Ithafat al-sanniya fi

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-SAFINA Encyclopedia Topic

"Anas bin Malik related the Prophet as saying: "Surely the likeness of my Ahl al-Bayt is similar to Noah's Ark, whoever boards it will attain salvation and whoever remains behind is drowned." The word safina means ark, and thus this tradition became known as the Hadith al-Safina. This tradition is narrated by eight Companions of the Prophet, and eight persons from the disciples of the Companions, and by sixty scholars and more than ninety authors.

This tradition has been narrated by Hakim Nishaburi in al-Mustadrak (2:343), Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad (21: 91) and other great recorders of traditions (al-Ghadir 2:300-1). Imam Shafi has said that, "When I saw different schools of thought directing people toward the seas of ignorance and deviation, I boarded the ark of salvation in the Name of God. This ark is verily crystallized in the Ahl al-Bayt of the Seal of the Prophets,"

The Prophet said: "We serve as the ark of salvation. Whoever holds fast to this ark will reach salvation and whoever deviates from it will be cast into perdition. Whoever wants God to grant him something should resort to the Ahl al-Bayt'." This tradition has been narrated by Shaykh al-Islam Hamu'i in the first chapter of Fara'id al-Samtayn and Khatib Khwarazmi in Manaqib (p. 252). Suyuti in his Dhur-e-Manthur quotes Ibn Shaiba that Ali bin Abu Talib said, "Our likeness to this Muslim ummah is that of Noah's Ark and the gate of remissions."

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-SAQLAINEncyclopedia Topic

The word saqlain means weighty or heavy thing. In his saying, the Prophet called the Koran and Ahl al-Bayt as the weighty things, and thus this tradition became known as Hadith al-Saqlain. This tradition was spoken on four major occasions, such as at Arfat (Tirmizi, 5:328), at Ghadir Khum (Nisai, 96:79), at Prophet's Mosque in Medina (Ibn Atiyyah, 1:34) and in Prophet's chamber during his last illness (Ibn Hajar, p. 89). This tradition however became more famous at Ghadir Khum. Besides, this tradition has been transmitted through more than a hundred channels by over 35 Companions of the Prophet.

Zaid bin Arqan reported: When the Prophet was returning from the Valedictory Pilgrimage, he halted at Ghadir al-Khum and said, "I am about to be summoned (by God) and I will respond (to His call). I am leaving in you two weighty things: one of them is bigger than other; the Book of God, and my Ahl al-Bayt. Beware how you shall treat them after me, for they shall not part from each other until you join me at the basin (on the judgment day)." (vide, Mustadrak, 3:109, al-Muslim, 15:180, Masnad, 4:367, etc.)

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-TA'IREncyclopedia Topic

The word ta'ir means a bird or a thing that flies off. Hakim in Mustadrik (3:130), Abu Nu'aym in Hilyah (6:339), etc. report that once when the Prophet sat down to eat a fowl that had been cooked for his dinner, he prayed to God: "My Lord, bring the most beloved of Your creatures, that he may eat this fowl with me." In the meantime, Ali bin Abu Talib came and the Prophet ate with him. Hence, this tradition became known as Hadith al-Ta'ir.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH AL-YAUM AL-DAR Encyclopedia Topic

The word yaum al-dar means the day of the house. In the fourth year of the Prophet's mission, God commanded him to proclaim openly his call. The Koran says: "And warn thy tribe of near kindred" (26:24). Thus, the Prophet invited the chiefs of Banu Hashim to a banquet. In the end, the Prophet stood and said, "I have brought for you the best of this world and the next. God has commanded me to invite you to it. Which of you will help me establish this religion, to be my brother and my successor?" The spell of hush prevailing over the audience was broken by impatient courage of Ali bin Abu Talib, who responded with enthusiasm and said, "O'Prophet of God! I am the youngest of all here, yet I beg to offer myself to stand by you and to share all your burdens and earn the great privilege of being your vicegerent." The Prophet caused Ali to sit down. Again he put the question to the assemblage. All remained silent but Ali rose for a second time to repeat his fidelity, and was again ordered to sit down. The Prophet repeated same question the third time, but got no response. Ali again stood up and repeated his fidelity. The Prophet said, "You are my brother, my collateral and vicegerent," vide Tabari (2:63), Tabaqat (1:171), Masnad (1:119), Ibn Athir (2:22), Abul Fida (1:116), etc.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH-I MANZILAEncyclopedia Topic

The word manzila means rank. The Prophet took march for military operations to Tabuk during the month of Rajab of the 9th year after Hijra. He departed from Medina heading an army of 25000 soldiers aiming at the borders of Jordan. He left Ali bin Abu Talib to take his place in Medina. Ali said to the Prophet, "Do you leave me with the children and the women?" The Prophet said, "Are you not satisfied to be to me like Aaron was to Moses, except that there shall be no prophet after me." (Bukhari, 6:3, Ibn Majah, 1:45, Tirmizi, 5:302, Masnad, 1:131, Mustadrak, 3:133, Ibn Hisham, 2:172, etc.)

The Prophet uttered the analogy between Ali and Aaron on many occasions as well. For instance, Umm Salim, the wife of Abu Ayub Ansari reported that the Prophet told her, "Umm Salim, the flesh of Ali is from my flesh and his blood is from my blood, and he is to me like Aaron to Moses." (vide, Kanzul Ummal, 5:32 by al-Muffaqi al-Hindi, etc.)

It indicates that the above hadith of the analogy gives Ali all the offices of Aaron except the prophethood. Aaron was the brother of Moses and his minister. The Koran states that Moses prayed to God, saying: "And give me a minister from my family: Aaron, my brother. Add to my strength through him" (20:24-31).

It is interesting to note that the Prophet had appointed temporary deputies during the following campaigns:-

Abu Lubabah was appointed in Medina when he left to the battle of Badr.

Ibn Arfatah when the Prophet left for Dumat al-Jandal.

Ibn Om Maktum during the operations against Banu Quraidah and Banu Lihyan.

Abu Tharr during the operations against Banu al-Mustalaq.

Numeila during the time of battle of Khaibar.

Ibn al-Adbat during Omrat al-Qada.

Abu Rahman during the conquest of Mecca.

Abu Dujana during the farewell pilgrimage.

The Prophet never said to any one of these temporary deputies what he had spoken of Ali bin Abu Talib: "You are to me like Aaron to Moses."

The Sunni writers believe that the Prophet appointed Ali as his deputy over Medina only during Prophet's expedition to Tabuk, but there is no evidence that Ali was deposed on the Prophet's return. Besides, if the Prophet's statement merely meant for the time of his absence from Medina, then there was no reason for him to add, "except that there shall be no prophet after me." This addition clearly indicates that the Prophet meant his permanent appointment over the Muslims.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HADITH-I QIRTASEncyclopedia Topic

There is the highly controversial episode in the last days of the Prophet's life, which is also called the Episode of Pen and Paper. The Prophet, while in his terminal illness and only days before his death, called for pen and paper. According to Bukhari (1:41), when the Prophet's illness became serious, he said, "Bring me writing materials that I may write for you something, after which you will not be led into error." Umar said, "The illness has overwhelmed the Prophet. We have the Book of God and that is enough for us." Then, the Prophet differed about this and spoke many words, and said, "Leave me! There ought not to be quarrelling in my presence." And Ibn Abbas went out saying, "The greatest of all calamities is what intervened between the Prophet and his writing."

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HadkaEncyclopedia Topic

Bones, skeleton

Various Sources HadoEncyclopedia Topic

Beat, play

Various Sources HaftEncyclopedia Topic

Seven

Various Sources HAI ZINDA - QAIM PAYAEncyclopedia Topic

In Ismaili tariqah when one enters the Jamatkhana, he in a bold clear voice utters Hai Zinda i.e., "He (Imam) is living." In reciprocation of which, those assembled within the prayer hall respond by pronouncing Qaim Paya i.e., (We) found (Imam) for ever." When the prayer is in progress, Hai Zinda is not pronounced aloud, but wished in the mind by those who enter the prayer hall. Pir Sadruddin said, "One who says Hai Zinda, he will be rewarded equal to an elephant given away in charity; and he who says Qaim Paya will get reward as if he has given a horse in charity." This is an old mode of describing the reward. The Prophet also said, "He who comes early to attend the Friday congregation will get the reward as if he has sacrificed a camel. The one who follows him will get the reward as if he has sacrificed a cow and he who follows him will be rewarded the sacrifice of a ram" (Miskhat, 1291).

These phrases are derived from the Koranic terms hayyiul qayyium (3:2), the synonymous of Persian terms Hazar Na'zar. The word hai signifies the One Who is Alive. This is also one of the names of God, indicating that He is Ever-Living. The word qayyum is derived from qayam, meaning to stand, indicating the One Who stands on His own, and also causes others to stand. The words hayyul qayyum are also used in the hadith for the Imam: "The earth cannot remain vacant without the hayyul qayyum Imam" (kalalan takhalun arzo min imam'mil hayyul qayyum). It means the Light of God is manifest on earth forever in the form of His epiphany i.e., the Imam.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral Haida / HaiduEncyclopedia Topic

Heart

Various Sources HaideEncyclopedia Topic

Heart

Various Sources Haido / haiduEncyclopedia Topic

Heart

Various Sources Haie / HaiyeEncyclopedia Topic

In the heart

Various Sources Hajar / HazarEncyclopedia Topic

Present, manifest, thousand

Various Sources HAJAR BEGName

Huzur Mukhi who was sent as a guardian with the young Sayyed Imam Shah to Pirana. He is also buried at Pirana. A Granth has also been dedicated to him.

Huzurmukhi qui fut envoyé comme gardien avec le petit Seyyed Imam Shah à Pirana ou il y est enterré. Aussi appelé Mamad (Sic) Beg. Un Granth lui est consacré.

Heritage Dictionary of ismailism, entry #263general Hajar jomoEncyclopedia Topic

Present Imam

Various Sources HajiEncyclopedia Topic

Yet

Various Sources HAJI BIBI CASEEncyclopedia Topic

When Imam Sultan Muhammad Shah was on tour of East African countries, a suit was filed against him at Bombay High Court on 1st Muharram, 1326/February 4, 1908 by Haji Bibi, the daughter of Aga Jhangi Shah and the widow of Muchul Shah (d. 1321/1903) with her son Samad Shah and Kutchuk Shah and 13 others. They claimed rights from the property of Imam Hasan Ali Shah. Haji Bibi demanded for monthly allowance, servants salaries, fooding, furniture, maintenance and car along with Rs. 9010/- per year at the rate of 6%. The court started the proceeding from January 4, 1908. The statements of the renowned persons had been recorded by court, and the history and the doctrines of the Ismailis were investigated to ascertain whether Pir Sadruddin and the early Khoja Ismailis were Ithna Asharis or not as had been claimed by them, and thus, almost 128 issues to this context had been examined. The statement of the Imam was also taken in the court on July 28, 30 and 31, 1908. Justice Louis Pitman Russell ruled against the plaintiffs on September 3, 1908, confirming the Imam's rights to the estate of his grandfather and to the offerings made to him by his followers. The ruling also established that the Nizari Ismailis were distinct from the Shi'as of the Ithna Ashari school.

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HAJJEncyclopedia Topic

"The word hajj literally means repairing to a thing for the sake of a visit (al-qasd li-l ziyara), and in the technicality of law of repairing to the House of God to observe the necessary devotions (iqamat an li-l-nusuk). The word hajj occurs nine times in the Koran in five different verse (2:189), three times in 2:196, three times; and once each in 2:197, 9:3 and 22:27.

The hajj takes place in Zul Hijja, the last month of the Muslim year. On the 7th day of the month, the pilgrims start the rite of ihram (derived from haram meaning prevention or forbidding, or entering upon a state in which a particular dress is put on. The ihram dress consists of two seamless sheets, a sheet reaching from the navel to below the knees and a sheet, which covers the upper part of the body. Both these sheets must be, preferably, white) from the miqat (a place where a person intending hajj), then enter al-masjid al-haram, preferably through bab as-salam (the gate of peace) and listen to a sermon describing the rites, which they are about to perform. The rites themselves begin on the 8th. After the dawn prayer, the participants perform tawaf (tawaf al-qudum, the making circumambulation of arrival) and sa'y. They then proceed to Mina, which is about three miles from Mecca, where they offer the prayers. After sunrise on the 9th, they proceed to the plain of Arafat, which is nine miles further east, repeating talbiya on the way. The talbiya consists in saying aloud labbaika Allah-umma labbaika means "Here am I, O God! Here am I in Your August Presence." At Arafat, the guide pitches a tent, either on the plain or, if possible, on the adjacent mountain, Jabal Rahma (the Mount of Mercy), the khutba is delivered from the pulpit of Jabal al-Rahma.

The wuquf (standing) at Arafat is the most important element of the hajj. The whole time of the pilgrims from afternoon till sunset is passed in glorifying God and crying aloud labbaika Allah-umma labbaika; a second sermon is preached, and the midday and late afternoon prayers are combined and performed. At sunset, the tents are struck, and at a given signal the pilgrims disperse on foot to Muzdalifa (a sacred spot in the wilderness between Arafat and the valley of Mina) repeating talbiya and prayers for forgiveness as they go. On arrival, the sunset and late evening prayers are said one after the other, and the night is spent in prayer. On the 10th, just before sunrise, the pilgrims collect a number of small pebbles the size of date stones, known as ramy al-jimar (ramy means throwing and jimar means small stones). Then, after the dawn prayer, they return to Mina where there are three stone pillars known as jamrat al-ula, jamrat al-wusta and jamrat al-aqaba. Each pilgrim throws seven pebbles at jamrat al-aqaba, which is the furthest pillar from Muzdalifa. He uses his right hand and recites with every throw: "In the name of God. God is Most Great. The casting of pebbles is against Satan." After this, the talbiys is no longer to be used. If possible, the pilgrim who can afford to do so proceeds to sacrifice a sheep, a goat or a camel, and has his head shaved. (A woman is not permitted to shave her head; she has about an inch of hair removed instead). The 10th Zilhijja is called yaum al-nahr (the day of sacrifice), being the day, which is celebrated as the Eid al-Adha all over the Muslim world. He may now resume his ordinary clothes until he has returned to Mecca and performed a further tawaf (tawaf al-wada, the tawaf of departure) and sa'y, which is normally done on the same day, and with it, the pilgrims emerge from the state of ihram. The pilgrims are required to stay in Mina for three or at least two days after the yaum al-nahr, that is, on 11th, 12th and 13th Zilhijja, and they are known by the name of ayyam al-tashriq or the days of tashriq. On the 13th, he again throws pebbles at the three pillars and then returns to Mecca. He performs tawaf (tawaf al-ziyara, the tawaf of visit) for the last time, followed by two rakas at the Station of Abraham. Finally, he drinks zamzam water while facing the Kaba and then departs.

"Muslim commentators generally acknowledge that the hajj contains many mysteries that no human intellect grasps fully" (Oxford Encyclopaedia of the Modern Islamic World, New York, 1995, 2:90). Haydar Amuli in his Asrar al-Sharfah (Tehran, 1983, pp. 221-4) gives three degrees of hajj, one for the exoterists (ahl al-shariah), one for those who follow the sufic path (ahl al-tariqah) and one for those who have attained the Reality (ahl-haqiqah).

The hajj rites, being symbols, are also indicated in the Koran from where the Sufis and the Batinis desired their meanings. For instance, "God has laid down that the Kaba, the inviolable temple, shall be a symbol for all mankind, and (so, too) the sacred month (of pilgrimage) and the garlanded offerings (are symbols) meant to make you aware of all that is on earth, and that God has full knowledge of everything" (5:97), and "Mountains of al-Safa and al-Marwa are among the symbols of God and whoever performs the hajj to the Kaba or performs umra, it is not harmful for him to perform tawaf between them" (2:158), and "As for the sacrifice of cattle, We have ordained it for you as one of the symbols set up by God, in which there is (much) good for you" (22:36). Commenting on the above verses, Muhammad Asad writes in The Messenger of the Quran (Gibraltar, 1980, note 47) that, "This stress on the symbolic character of all rites connected with the pilgrimage is meant to draw the believer's attention to the spiritual meaning of those rites, and thus to warn him against making unthinkingly a sort of fetish of them."

Ibn Arabi in his Tafsir al-Koran al-Karim (Beirut, 1978, 2:123) interprets the pilgrimage ritual as the inner devotion of a pious person along his journey to God. Thus, Mecca is, for Ibn Arabi, the breast and the Kaba is the heart contained in it. The sacred monument (al-mash'ar al-haram) is the inner faculty where God must be remembered and in which His beauty may be seen. As for the remembrance of God in this station of spiritual pilgrimage, Ibn Arabi says, "It is an act of witnessing (mushahadah). God first guides you to the remembrance (zikr) of the tongue, which is the zikr of the soul. He then guides you to the zikr of heart, which is the zikr of the actions from which the favours and bounties of God flow. After this He guides you to the zikr of the innermost faculty (sirr), which is the true version and revelation of the sciences of the manifestations (tajalliyat) of the divine attributes. God then guides you to the zikr of the spirit, which is the witnessing of the manifestations of the attributes and the discernment of the light of the Divine essence. He then guides you to the inner zikr (al-zikr al-khafi), which is the witnessing of the beauty of the Divine essence, where duality is still present (that is, of subject and object). Finally, He guides you to the zikr of the Divine essence which is the witnessing of the essence where all other things are abolished." Lastly, Ibn Arabi quotes when Junayd (d. 910) was asked, "Where is the end ?" He answered, "It is the return to the beginning."

Muhammad bin al-Fadl says: "I wonder at those who seek His temple (Kaba) in this world: why do not they seek contemplation of Him in their hearts? The temple they sometimes attain and sometimes miss, but contemplation they might enjoy always. If they are bound to visit a stone, which is looked at only once a year, surely they are more bound to visit the temple of the heart, where He may be seen three hundred and sixty times in a day and night. But the mystic's every step is a symbol of the journey to Mecca, and when he reaches the sanctuary he wins a robe of honour for every step." (cf. Kash al-Mahjub by Hujwiri, tr. By Nicholson, London, 1967, p. 327).

Hujwiri (d. 465/1072) further writes that, "Pilgrimages are of two kinds (1) in absence (from God) and (2) in presence (of God). Anyone who is absent from God at Mecca is in the same position as if he were absent from God in his own house; and anyone who is present with God in his own house is in the same position as if he were present with God in Mecca. Pilgrimage is an act of mortification (mujdhadat) for the sake of obtaining contemplation (mushahadat), and mortification does not become the direct cause of contemplation, but is only a means to it. Therefore, inasmuch as a means has no further effect on the reality of things, the true object of pilgrimage is not to visit the Kaba, but to obtain contemplation of God." (Ibid., p. 329). Muhammad Yusuf bin Jafar al-Makki observes in Bihar ul-Ma'ani that, "The way to God lies in the mu'min's heart, and that is just a step away, therefore seek Him in the heart, for the true hajj is the hajj of the heart."

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HajurEncyclopedia Topic

Present, in the presence, presence

Various Sources HakEncyclopedia Topic

Voice, call, sound

Various Sources HAKIM (386-411/996-1021) 16TH IMAMEncyclopedia Topic

He was born on 23rd Rabi I, 375/August 14, 985 in Cairo, and was the first Fatimid Imam born on Egyptian soil. His name was al-Mansur Abu Ali, surnamed al-Hakim bi-Amrillah (He who governs by the orders of God). He acceded the throne in 386/996 at the age of 11 years, 5 months and 6 days. Makrizi writes in Itti’az (p. 386) that, "On the following morning the dignitaries assembled in the Grand Hall to await the new Caliph. Al-Mansur, wearing the diamond turban, entered the Hall and walked to the golden throne, the assembly bowing to the ground meanwhile. They greeted him with the baya as Imam and the title al-Hakim bi-Amrillah by which he was thereafter known." Abul Fawaris Ahmad bin Yaqub (d. 413/1022) writes in Ar-Risala fi’l Imama (comp. 408/1077) that Imam al-Hakim delivered his first speech from the pulpit of a mosque in Cairo on 386/996 and said: "O’ people, surely God has made us superior by the word of Imamate. He has eternalized it in us, so that it may last until the day of doom. The one of us receives it from the other and the son inherits it from the father. This is the bounty of God, He gives it to whomever He wishes, and God is of bounty abounding."

Imam al-Hakim, assumed full power of the empire at the age of fourteen, and thus it does not appear to have affected his early education. He had a good command of Arabic tongue, and a fine knowledge of poetry at an early age. Antaki (d. 458/1065) writes in Tarikh-i Antaki (Beirut, 1909, p. 217) that, "He appears as a pleasant man with a sense of humour, and often exchanged jokes with those to whom he spoke in the streets." Antaki also writes, "Al-Hakim would frequently pause in the streets of his capital to exchange greetings or answer questions from his poor subjects." (Ibid. p. 200) Marshall Hodgson writes in The Venture of Islam (London, 1974, 2:26) that, "Al-Hakim wished, above all, to be the perfect ruler; widely generous, enforcing strict good order, and absolutely just to all the people. Personally, he avoided all luxury and mounted a simple donkey for his excursions."

Imam al-Hakim is described as generous and brave by the chroniclers. His clothes were simple, made chiefly of wool, and chose to ride on an ass. He disliked diamond turban and wore plain white scarf. His food was simple, and that too cooked by his mother only. He was an impressive figure, tall and broad-shouldered with a powerful voice. His large eyes were dark blue and flecked with deep reddish gold.

The Berbers dominated the Fatimid army, known in Egypt as Maghriba (the westerners). Imam al-Aziz had introduced the Turkish and Iranian soldiers in the army, known as Mashriqa (the easterners), as a counterpoise against the fast growing influence of the Berbers. Only two days after the death of Imam al-Aziz, the Maghriba faction in the army began to raise and stipulated that no one but Ibn Ammar should be the wasita (chief minister). Ibn Ammar negotiated with them, securing their goodwill in exchange for increased payment.

Ibn Ammar intended to establish a purely Berber government in Egypt. His rule, indeed, was characterized by unmasked favourism of the Maghriba. Rudhrawari (d. 488/1095) writes that, "The aim of the Maghriba was to abolish the institution of the Fatimid Imam and build an empire of their own. Ibn Ammar’s friends advised him to kill Imam al-Hakim. Ibn Ammar, who intended to follow their advices, but dissuaded later on because Imam al-Hakim was too young and harmless." (cf. Tajarib al-Umam by Miskawayh, p. 222). The Berber tribe of Katama, known as Maghriba appears to have been the centres of this change, as they considered that they had been the conquerors of Maghrib and of Egypt, and why should the fruits of this conquest be laid at the feet of an Arab dynasty in the progeny of Ali. Immediately after his appointment, Ibn Ammar began to allocate high positions to his supporters. He dismissed the Turkish and Iranian soldiers from the high posts, and restored the power of the Berbers. He also curtailed the power of Abul Futuh Barjawan, the regent of the Imam, and confined him as a tutor of Imam al-Hakim in the palace. The chiefs of Mashriqa thus had been dismissed and some of their supporters were even executed. Annual allowances to them were stopped, and many of them fled from Egypt fearing being killed.

Barjawan allied himself with the Turkish commander called, Manjutagin, who himself was a great force in Syria. He readily espoused to Barjawan’s faction, and formed an alliance with some of the Bedouin chiefs and left Damascus at the head of six thousand troops to march towards Egypt. Ibn Ammar mobilized his troops under the leadership of Suleman bin Falah and provided him with the large sums of money to be used in diverting the loyalty of the Bedouin chiefs against Manjutagin. The two armies clashed between Ramla and Askalan, and after three days of minor encounters, they fought the final battle. Manjutagin was subdued and taken prisoner and sent captive to Cairo. The battle resulted in victory for the Maghriba, but impugned a dangerous problem to the state, a fast growing opposition between the Maghriba and Mashriqa in Egypt. The defeated Mashriqa arrived in Cairo and threatened Ibn Ammar’s rule, while the majority of Maghriba were in Syria with Suleman bin Falah. To overcome the problem, Ibn Ammar planned to increase his supporters and at the same time adopted a moderate line of policy towards Mashriqa, and pardoned Manjutagin. Suleman bin Falah also followed a similar policy in Syria and tried to convince its inhabitants that his plans were for peace and security. He dismissed Jaysh ibn Samsama from the governorship of Tripoli and replaced him with his own brother Ali.

Thus, Jaysh, a powerful Katama chief, went to Cairo to revenge himself by attempting to overthrow Ibn Ammar. He made an alliance with Barjawan and the chiefs of Mashriqa. Barjawan’s opportunity to gain power came with the presence of Jaysh in Egypt. He provoked riots and disturbances in Cairo and threw the blames on Ibn Ammar and his supporters. Ibn Ammar invited them to his palace under the pretext to discuss the riots between Berbers and Turks, but secretly had planned their executions. However, Barjawan, who had planted many spies in Ibn Ammar’s palace, was informed of this and formed a counter plan. He and his supporters decided to accept the invitation. They planned to foil the attack by retreating among them, thus exposing Ibn Ammar’s treasonable intentions. Barjawan’s plan succeeded and he and his allies returned to the royal palace, declared Ibn Ammar to be a traitor and prepared to fight. With as many supporters as he could muster, Ibn Ammar left Cairo and camped in the desert. Barjawan followed him and in a battle, which lasted half a day, Ibn Ammar was defeated, and fled. By the overthrow of Ibn Ammar in 387/997, Barjawan assumed the office of wasita (chief minister) after Ibn Ammar had held office for a little less than eleven months. Barjawan took out Imam al-Hakim in public to demonstrate his loyalty towards the Fatimids.

Barjawan pardoned Ibn Ammar and granted him the same monthly allowances and supplies that he had received during the period of Imam al-Aziz. With his accession to power, Abul Futuh Barjawan had to face a number of problems. He however handled the situation, and endeavoured to get an end of it, or at least to lessen the rivalry between Maghriba and Mashriqa. In the appointment of key posts, he tried to create equality, which would satisfy the average persons of both groups. He appointed Ismail bin Fahl al-Katami, a Maghriba chief as the governor of Tyre and Bushara al-Ikhshidi, a Mashriqa chief as the governor of Damascus. For the governor generalship of Syria and the supreme command of the Fatimid forces stationing there, he chose Jaysh ibn Samsama, a powerful Maghriba chief. He made an efficient Christian, Fahd bin Ibrahim al-Katib as his personal secretary and invested him the title of al-Rais (the master).

Barjawan now governed the state with unbounded authority. He wanted to make the Imam merely an ornamented figure in the palace, and bring him out to grace only in the state functions. He treated Imam al-Hakim as helpless child and did not allow him even to ride on horseback. Ibn Muyassar in Akhbar al-Misr (p. 56) and Makrizi in al-Khitat (2:4) consider such treatment as dictatorship (istibdad), causing Imam al-Hakim’s resentment which resulted his death.

Ibn Qalanisi (p. 51) writes that, "Abul Fazal Raydan, the bearer of the royal parasol (mizalla), once said to Imam al-Hakim, “Barjawan is planning to emulate the career of Malik Kafur (d. 357/968) and purposes to deal with you as Malik Kafur dealt with Ikhshidi’s son by isolating you and eliminating your power. The right thing to do is his immediate murder and administer your state alone.” Imam replied, “If this is your opinion and advice, then I need your help." Barjawan was finally slain on 16th Rabi II, 390/March 25, 1000 by Abul Fazal Raydan, who carried out the murder with his associates in a place called Bustan Duwayrat al-Tin. Barjawan held his office for 2 years, 7 months and 29 days. In terms of wealth and power, Barjawan was typical of the top echelon of the ruling circles. Ibn Bassam (d. 542/1148) writes in al-Dhakhira fi Mahasin al-Jazira (Cairo, 1945, p. 232) that after the death of Barjawan, an officer of central treasury found in his house: one hundred scarves (mandil) of different colours, one hundred another kind of scarves (sharabiya), one thousand pairs of trousers (sirwal), one Armenian silk (takka), an uncountable quantity of clothes, jewels, gold, perfumes and furniture, three hundred thousand dinars, one hundred and fifty horses and mules in his personal stable, three hundred pack horses and mules and a hundred and fifty saddles, twenty of which were pure gold.

Imam al-Hakim took over the power into hand at the age of fourteen years. Barjawan’s execution provoked some apprehension among the people, but he skillfully navigated the storm. He went out to the people and declared: "I have been informed of an intrigue which Barjawan made against me, and for that I caused him to be executed." Makrizi writes in Itti’az (p. 427) that Imam al-Hakim speaking before an assembly next day of state dignitaries (shuyukh ad-dawla), the leaders of Katama and Turks, said: "Barjawan was my slave and I employed him. He acted in good faith and I treated him with favours. He then began to misbehave, so I killed him." The death of Barjawan marks the beginning of the second period of Imam al-Hakim’s reign.

The period between 390/1000 and 396/1007 was critical because of famine and economical distress. There was also a general deterioration of economic and social life between 395/1004 and 411/1021 when most of the royal decrees (manshur) covering religious and social legislation were issued by the Imam. He had to take drastic measures by pressure of circumstances. On account of his extreme measures to meet the challenges, he became a controversial figure. Historians have held different opinions for him. Abul Fida, Ibn Athir and Ibn Khallikan depict him as an heretic and wily tyrant. Prof. Hitti, on the other hand, defends him, and writes in The Origins of the Druze People and Religion (New York, 1928, p. 27) that, "The fact that al-Hakim introduced many reforms regulating weights and measures, fought immorality with police ordinances ... amidst a hostile milieu indicates that he was not the kind of maniac or fool whose biography these early writers have left us."

Antaki and Ibn al-Sabi’s records discrediting Imam al-Hakim’s personality should be treated with a degree of caution since both historians were aggressive and lived in distant countries. Imam al-Hakim’s so called cruelty may have been the result of the circumstances rather than the acts of a sadist, or were perhaps exaggerated according to the view of the hostile historians. He ascended when he was still a child and witnessed fierce struggle and rivalry for power among the high officials of his state. This may have created a sense of insecurity, which led him to resort to so called cruelty as a tool of maintaining his power. Ibn al-Futi, who is quoted by Makrizi in Itti’az (p. 411) suggests that, "al-Hakim’s cruelty was both part of his policy to abolish the corruption resulting from his father’s great tolerance, and vengeance against those who oppose the Islamic law of the state."

Muhammad Abdullah al-Inan writes in his al-Hakim bi-Amrillah wa Asrar al-Dawa al-Fatimiya (Cairo, 1937, p. 173) that, "We are however unable to understand different political enigmas of al-Hakim, but it is beyond doubt that the ordinances and injunctions he imposed were not against the Islamic traditions to a little extent. These were also not the result of the whimsical thoughts, but based on the ordinary reformations of the state, therefore, the wisdom and strategy motivated behind them can never be ruled out." Dozy also writes in Essai sur l’historire de I’Islamism (Leiden, 1879, p. 148) that, "We fail to know the enigmatic personality of the Fatimid Caliph al-Hakim, therefore, it is not plausible to draw a conclusion that these were the outcome of whimsical thoughts."

The constant struggle for power between the two elements in the Fatimid’s army presented Imam al-Hakim with a very serious problem. His position was also threatened by the growing influence of mudabbir ad-dawla (the administrator of state affairs), better known as wasita (the mediator, executor of the Caliph’s orders or chief minister), simply an intermediary between the Imam and the people. Both Ibn Ammar and Barjawan had forcefully seized power and became themselves as wasitas, and misused the office. This was the first crack in the political structure. In the face of this trend, Imam al-Hakim’s attitude towards each successive wasita during the last twenty years of his Caliphate, was well and carefully planned to control his exercise of power. He did not abolish the institution of wasita, but restricted its power. Makrizi writes in Itti’az (p. 390) that, "After the appointment of al-Hussain bin Jawhar as wasita in 390/1000, he was ordered not to receive or deal with petitions in his own house or in public streets; those who had cases of complaints should be told to deliver them to him only at the office in the palace." Hussain bin Jawhar together with his secretary, Fahd bin Ibrahim, would come early to the palace, receive the petitions, study them and carry them to the Imam for final judgment. Except for Hussain bin Jawhar and Ali bin Falah, none of the wasita had a military background. None was powerful tribal chief or a chief of any element of the army. Most of them were from poor class. No wasita was allowed to remain in office for a long period. In the course of his twenty years of rule, Imam al-Hakim employed more than fifteen wasita, some held office for as little as ten days. Severity was the prominent feature in Imam al-Hakim’s attitude towards his wasitas, and the majority of those who occupied that office were executed. Thus, Ibn Hammad (d. 628/1230) writes in Akhbar al-Muluk Bani Ubayd wa Siyaratihim (p. 57) that al-Jarjara’i, a high official who had lost both hands by the command of Imam al-Hakim, would tell those who remarked upon such treatment that: "This was a punishment which I deserved for betraying amir al-mominin’s orders." According to Marshall Hodgson in The Venture of Islam (London, 1974, 2:27), "He was merciless to any of the great who, he thought, took advantage of their position."

Historians have generally shown Imam al-Hakim’s attitude as a tyrant and blood-thirsty. Such views, however, do not seem to be quite accurate, and many have been hastily arrayed without a thorough investigation. P.J. Vatikiotis writes in The Fatimid Theory of State (Lahore, 1957, p. 149), that, "These presentations have been hastily arrayed without a genuine investigation of al-Hakim’s reign." This part of Imam al-Hakim’s policy cannot be described as blood-thirsty or insane. Imam al-Hakim was extremely engaged in a deadly struggle of retaining the Fatimid Caliphate. He was not fighting only the secular tendencies of political power groups, but also attempting to rally the fast disintegrating Fatimid ranks in the face of impending danger.

It is a common method, which most rulers used to adopt to silence opposition and prevent threats to their own powers. There is no evidence suggesting that, at any time, Imam al-Hakim ordered the execution of someone just for the sake of killing. His bursts of killing, as M.G.S. Hodgson says in "al-Darazi and Hamza in the Origin of the Druze Religion (JAOS, 82, 1962, p. 14), "were most obviously turned against the great and the proud, the holders of positions and those ambitious to be such." There were more precisely against those from whom Imam al-Hakim anticipated danger or considered a threat to his power. A comparative study of his attitude towards qadi al-qudat (chief judge) with the manner in which he treated the wasita and military chiefs illustrates this point. It was only qadis who opposed his policy who were executed; others were treated quite normally. During his entire reign, Imam al-Hakim employed five persons to that post of qadi al-qudat. Muhammad bin Noman died in 389/998 and Imam al-Hakim himself led the prayer at his funeral. His successor, Hussain bin Noman served until 395/1004 when he was executed after being found guilty of theft. Muhammad bin Yousuf al-Kindi (d. 330/951) writes in Kitab al-Umra wa’l Kitab al-Qudat (London, 1912, p. 608) that, "Hussain bin Noman stole twenty thousand dinars from an orphan whose father entrusted the money to him. His trial was personally conducted by al-Hakim." Abdul Aziz bin Noman succeeded until 399/1008 when he was dismissed, and two years later executed for opposing Imam al-Hakim and supporting Hussain bin Jawhar. Malik bin Sa’id al-Fariqi served for 6 years, 9 months and 10 days (399/1008 to 405/1014) and was executed for opposing Imam al-Hakim’s policy for imposing Islamic laws. In 405/1014, Imam al-Hakim appointed Muhammad bin Abi’l Awwam as qadi al-qudat and Khatgin as a da’i al-duat, and both remained in office until the end of Imam al-Hakim’s rule because of their loyalty with the rules imposed.

Barjawan was able to overcome the chronic problems in Syria, and appointment of Jaysh ibn Samsama as a governor general and the commander of the Fatimid forces, indicates a shrewd policy. Jaysh was a powerful Maghriba leader and was also a popular figure among the Mashriqa. Initially, he had four major problems to be confronted when he reached Syria: the rebellion in Tyre, the rebellion of Mufraj bin Dagfal, the unrest in Damascus and the Byzantine invasions into the Fatimid territory. Jaysh at first moved into the action to subdue the rebellion in Tyre, an important port on the Mediterranean coast; whose inhabitants, supported by the Byzantines, had rose against the Fatimid suzerainty during the clash between Barjawan and Ibn Ammar. Their leader, a sailor called Ullaqah had declared Trye an independent, and issued new coinage with the slogan, "Dignity and plenty instead of humility and poverty, Amir Ullaqah" (uzzun ba’da faqah al-amir Ullaqah). Jaysh appointed Abu Abdullah al-Hussain and Ibn Nasir ad-Dawla al-Hamdani to lead the expedition against Trye, and himself stayed with the rest of the forces in Palestine, preparing another expedition against Mufraj bin Dagfal. He also ordered the governors of Tripoli and Sidon to join together with their warships in the forthcoming fighting against Tyre. In the ensuing battle, the Fatimid forces ravaged the Byzantine ships, and at length, Tyre fell before the onslaught of the Fatimid forces. The Fatimid troops entered the city and declared immunity (aman) and safe-conduct for all who remained in their homes. Ullaqah was arrested and sent to Cairo.

After suppression of rebellion in Tyre, Jaysh proceeded towards Palestine, where Mufraj bin Dagfal was plundering the towns and attacking the pilgrim caravans. When confronted with the big army of Jaysh, Mufraj capitulated and sent a delegation, asking for safe-conduct and promised to advance his loyalty to the Fatimids. Jaysh, who was pressed by more serious problems in northern Syria, pardoned him and withdrew his army to the north.

Jaysh thence advanced towards Damascus, and as soon as he entered the city, according to Ibn Athir (9: 50), he declared that his prime objective was to wage war against the Byzantine and establish peace and security in Damascus. He also announced the death penalty for any one, whether his soldiers or other citizens, who proved guilty of disturbing the peace in the city. Jaysh then moved towards Hims, where the governor of Tripoli and his troops and a number of volunteers, augmented Jaysh’s army in his fight against the Byzantines, who had besieged Afamiya at that time.

Jaysah arrived at Afamiya during the hour when the city was in great distress and about to fall into the hands of Byzantines. In the ensuing battle lasted for a few days, Jaysh faced defeat in the beginning. In the interim, a Muslim soldier managed to kill the Byzantine commander, causing demoralization among the Christian troops. The Byzantine troops were defeated, who took wild flight from the field. Jaysh followed the defeated Byzantines as far as Antioch and besieged the city for a few days, but he at once lifted the siege and returned to Damascus.

It must be remembered that Ibn Ammar had instituted a group of the young men (ahdath) from among the Maghriba in Damascus against the Mashriqa. The Ahdath, an urban militia, commanded by al-Rais (master) or al-Rais al-Bilad, whose influence exceeded that of the qadi. As armed and pugnacious men of the native-born population, the Ahdath had constituted in face of the political authorities. The Ahadath had assumed the principal power and were the main cause of the troubles in Damascus. Jaysah tried to cope with these elements and finally decided to eliminate them once and for all. During his early arrival in Damasus, he delayed his plan owing to the raids of the Byzantines on northern Syria. After suppression of the Byzantine influence in Tyre and the troubles created by Mufraj bin Dagfal, he returned to Damascus to strike a final blow on the Ahdath. According to Qalanisi (p. 51), he invited the chiefs of Ahdath to his camp, which he had pitched outside the city, and had them killed. He at once besieged the city and sent his troops inside to search and kill the remaining ashes of Ahdath. This operation clean-up cost the death toll of 1200 persons and brought fear to the inhabitants, but Jaysh declared for their safe-conduct and promised security and peace under the suzerainty of the Fatimids. This was of course a bloody operation, but at the same time it was a last resort and the only effective solution to solve the problems of Damascus, where peace was restored for a long time. During the first three years of Imam al-Hakim’s rule, two major anti-Fatimid uprisings occurred in Damascus. It was the untiring efforts of Jaysh ibn Samsama that these rebellions had been subdued in 388/998. Imam al-Hakim’s aim was to win the loyalty, therefore, he paid due attention to the welfare of Damascus and appointed considerable governors, some of whom were recalled after only a few months. Thus, 21 governors are reported to have been appointed in Syria during the 22 years of Imam al-Hakim’s rule. He did not hesitate to dismiss any governor who exceeded his authority or caused discontent among the inhabitants.

Jaysh ibn Samsama died on 390/1000 at Damascus. His son went to Cairo with a paper on which his father had written his will and a detailed statement of all his property: all this, he declared, belonged to Imam al-Hakim; his children had no rights. The property thus valued was estimated at 200,000 pieces of gold. His son brought all this before the Imam, who said, "I have read your father’s will and the statement of the money and goods of which he has disposed by his will. Take it, and enjoy it in tranquility and for your happiness."

Imam al-Hakim had also contemplated to extend his authority to Aleppo, the greatest centre of northern Syria. The last Hamdanid ruler, Sa’id ad-Dawla had been killed in 392/1002 by the conspiracy of his minister, called Lulu; who abolished the Hamdanid dynasty in Aleppo and established his own. The real power behind Aleppo was however the Byzantines, who used to be called when their help needed to the rulers. Thus, Imam al-Hakim made a non-aggression pact (hudna) with Basil II, the emperor of Byzantine and weakened the reliance of Aleppo on Byzantine help.

There appears different of views as to the negotiation of non-aggression pact (hudna) between the Muslim and Christian empires. Ibn Qalanisi (p. 54) writes that in 390/1000, Barjawan moved first by sending a friendly letter through his Christian secretary, Fahd bin Ibrahim al-Katib, expressing the Fatimid desire for the pact. Antaki (p. 184) however states that the Byzantine emperor, Basil II took the initiative by deputing his two envoys to negotiate peace with the Fatimids. In sum, the agreement was initially for a period of ten years, but it remained enforced through out Imam al-Hakim’s period, and the relations between them were strengthened. Envoys and presents were exchanged between the two rulers and trade and commercial activities continued uninterrupted except for a brief period.

The events which occurred in Aleppo after the death of its ruler, Lulu in 399/1008 facilitated Imam al-Hakim’s policy and assisted him to achieve his goal. Lulu’s son Mansur, succeeding his father, was faced with numerous enemies, including Abul Hayja, the Hamdanid prince who came from Byzantium with Byzantine support to restore the rule of his ancestors. Mansur received investiture from Imam al-Hakim and virtually became a Fatimid vassal. The Imam supported Mansur against Abul Hayja, who had taken field and defeated.

In 406/1016, Mansur was defeated in a battle by Saleh bin Mirdas, the chief of the Banu Kilab. Mansur took refuge with the Byzantines after leaving a citadel under the control of a certain Fath, who was secretly in contact with Imam al-Hakim. Thus, the Imam granted the title of Asad ad-Dawla (lion of the state) to Saleh bin Mirdas and Mubarak ad-Dawla (blessed of the state) to Fath. On the other hand, Imam al-Hakim commanded his troops encamped in Syria to move towards Aleppo to prevent any pact between Saleh and Fath against the Fatimids. In 407/1017, the first Fatimid governor appointed by Imam al-Hakim entered Aleppo, called Fatik, bearing the title of Aziz ad-Dawla. Ibn al-Adim (d. 660/1262) writes in Zubdat al-Halab fi Tarikh Halab (Damascus, 1951, 1:214) that Imam al-Hakim issued an edict addressing to the inhabitants of Aleppo that, "When Amir al-mominin learned of the tyranny and ill treatment you suffered from those in powers, burdening you with taxes and harsh imposts out of all proportion to the ways of Islam, he, may God strengthen his power, ordered supplies to be sent to you from the state’s stores and to exempt you from the kharaj until the year 407. By this you will know that the light of righteousness has risen and the darkness of tyranny has been dispelled."

The Byzantine emperor however opposed the Fatimid foothold in Aleppo, but did not break the non-aggression pact. He put restrictions upon the trade with Aleppo and cemented his close ties with the Mirdasids in order to employ them against Fatik. The remote distance of Cairo, the threats and offers of his Byzantine contacts and his personal ambition, made it easy for Fatik to show his back to the Fatimids. Soon afterwards, Fatik began to rule as an independent ruler in Aleppo and dismissed the officials appointed by Imam al-Hakim and employed men of his own choice.

Imam al-Hakim realized that a demonstration of the Fatimid arm forces was necessary to maintain his authority in Aleppo, therefore, he ordered his governor in Syria to prepare for a quick expedition against Fatik. On the other side, the troops of the Byzantine also came into action and started moving from the north to the south to support their interests. It was only the sudden death of Imam al-Hakim that had prevented the two empires from breaking peace which had lasted between them for more than 20 years.

Imam al-Muizz had vested Buluggin bin Ziri (d. 373/984) with the governorship of all the Fatimid dominions in the Maghrib except for the Kalbid Sicily and Tripoli in 361/972. Later on, Buluggin asked Imam al-Aziz to give him rule over Tripoli as well. His request was granted and from 365/975, Tripoli began to be ruled by the Zirids. Buluggin appointed Tamsulat bin Bakkar as the amir of Tripoli, who governed the province for 20 years. In 386/996, after the death of Mansur, the second Zirid ruler, the relation between Tamsulat and Badis (d. 406/1016), the third Zirid ruler were strained. Tamsulat wrote to Cairo, asking Barjawan to send a new amir for Tripoli. Barjawan’s error was that without the consent of Badis, he appointed Yanis as the amir of Tripoli in 388/998, who was then the amir of Barqa. Badis wrote a letter to Yanis, asking for an explanation of his move from Barqa to Tripoli, but he received no satisfactory reply. Realizing the danger that Yanis represented, Badis sent his troops into battle against him. In the ensuing battle, Yanis was killed and his forces retreated to Tripoli, where they barricaded themselves awaiting help from Cairo.

The above military actions of Barjawan in Tripoli supported no decree from Imam al-Hakim. It however affected the relations between the Fatimids and the Zirids. In addition, Tripoli, over which the dispute had begun, was occupied neither by the Fatimids nor by the Zirids, but it came in the hands of the enemy of both, i.e., the Banu Zanata. Fulful (d. 402/1011), the chief of Zanata tribe had taken an opportunity and proceeded towards Tripoli. He entered the city and declared his support against the Zirids and proclaimed his loyalty to the Umayyad of Spain.

Hence, the Fatimids lost Tripoli for about ten years (390-400/999-1009). After restoration of peace in Egypt, Imam al-Hakim turned his attention towards Tripoli. He dispatched his forces at the command of Yahya al-Andulusi as a new amir of Tripoli, and commanded Raydan at Tripoli to give Yahya a sum of money for expenses. Raydan, who most probably appropriated the money, instead gave Yahya a signed order to collect money from Barqa. When Yahya reached Barqa, he found the state treasury depleted. Most of the soldiers in his troops belonged to Banu Qorra, whom he had promised generous payment. Thus, Yahya faced difficulties in the field. Banu Qorra not only deserted Yahya, but they also raided his camps in angry and pillaged whatever they found and returned to their territory. Henceforward, Yahya entered Tripoli with the remaining troops. He was overpowered by the Zanata chief, Fulful, who humiliated him and took control of Tripoli, proclaiming his loyalty to the Umayyad of Spain. On other side, Imam al-Hakim did not send any reinforcement to regain Tripoli, and as a result, the Fatimids lost their suzerainty in Maghrib. Their relations with the Zirids also deteriorated, and the Sanhaja tribe ruled there independently.

In 395/1004, Imam al-Hakim faced the most serious challenge to his authority against the rebellion that rocked the foundation of his state. This was the rebellion of Abu Raqwa, an Umayyad prince who united the forces of Berbers of Zanata with those of the Arab tribe of Banu Qorra to lead them against the Fatimids. The word raqwa means leather bag, in which travellers, especially the Sufis, carried water during journey. He was an Umayyad prince from the line of Marwan bin Hakam. In his twenties, he fled from Spain and travelled to Maghrib, Egypt, Yamen, Mecca and Syria; testing the possibility of creating a group strong enough to support the Umayyad cause. At length, he succeeded to generate a large following in Maghrib and proclaimed himself as an amir.

Besides the rooted opposition of Zanata and the dissatisfaction of Banu Qorra with the Fatimids, the economic factors also appear to have been the main cause behind the rebellion of Abu Raqwa. The province of Barqa in Maghrib was very poor, and its treasury was even insufficient to supply the needs of the small army which Imam al-Hakim sent in 391/1000 to restore Fatimid suzerainty in Tripoli. Its commercial life was limited and its income depended upon its limited agricultural output. The whole of Maghrib preceding the rebellion was caught with economic crisis, resulting a sort of catastrophe in 395/1004. Ibn Idhari (d. 712/1312) writes in Akhbar al-Andalus wa’l Maghrib (1:256) that, "In 395/1004, there was a catastrophe in Africa. The poor died and the money of the rich vanished. Prices rose and food became impossible to find. The people of Badia left their homes. Houses became empty and there was no one to occupy them. With all this there was a plague of cholera." Abu Raqwa understood the difficulties of the tribesmen, their overwhelming desire to solve their problems, and therefore, he concentrated his effort to this point. The situation turned in his favour as an effective tool of his rebellion. When the people agreed to follow his rebellious leadership, the first pact he executed with the people concerning the booty and gains resulting from war. It was resolved to divide the booty into three shares: one for each tribe and one third to be retained under Abu Raqwa’s control in order to form a treasury to help during the war. He also promised to give the chiefs the palaces and houses of the Fatimid state in Cairo and other fertile regions in Egypt.

After being assured himself of sufficient support from the two principal tribes, Abu Raqwa canvassed neighboring districts, where he delivered speeches about Islam in a revolutionary manner. The tribesmen were fascinated by his eloquence, and assembled under his leadership against the Fatimids. Sandal, the Fatimid chief of Barqa immediately reported to Imam al-Hakim and asked permission to campaign against him. According to Ibn Athir (9:82), "Al-Hakim, who apparently did not realize the urgency of the problem, neither gave permission nor sent help but recommended diplomacy, not militant stance as a solution." Sandal’s action failed, and Abu Raqwa with his troops swiftly marched to invade the city of Barqa. Sandal and his troops met them outside the city, and were subdued after a fierce fighting. Sandal retreated and barricaded himself inside the city. Sandal also contacted Ibn Taybun, the chief of the Berber tribe of Lawata, who came to the rescue and forced Abu Raqwa to break the siege, but failed to defeat him. Abu Raqwa then inflicted a heavy defeat on Lawata’s forces and got the loss of many fighters including Ibn Taybun. The inhabitants of Barqa with their chief Sandal took advantage of Abu Raqwa’s temporary withdrawal from their city, and strongly fortified its walls, digging huge trenches around them and storing as much food and supplies as they could. When Abu Raqwa returned to the siege, he found the city in a much stronger position to defend than before. Several months of siege, he failed to convince Sandal to surrender. Meanwhile, Imam al-Hakim sent an army of five thousand men under the leadership of Yanal to relieve Barqa. Yanal had to cross considerable stretch of desert before he reached Barqa, and Abu Raqwa sent a body of cavalry across the route to fill in the wells. He then waited at the point farthest from Egypt to meet Yanal’s forces, who arrived tired, exhausted and thirsty. Yanal was defeated and was scourged to death. Abu Raqwa sacked his all equipments and supplies, and returned to Barqa. Sandal, together with his family, fled to Cairo. In the month of Zilhaja, 395/October, 1005, Abu Raqwa captured Barqa, and declared himself amir al-mominin. This was struck on the coinage too, and the khutba was read in his name.

Al-Musabbihi (d. 420/1029) writes that Abu Raqwa’s supporters regarded him as a caliph. About a year after his occupation of Barqa, Abu Raqwa was driven out by the threat of famine and plague. He and his supporters left Barqa as if they were migrating from one land to another, and proceeded towards Alexandria. Imam al-Hakim began his preparations to quell the rebellion, and appointed Fazal bin Saleh to arrange a large force to meet Abu Raqwa in the field. Meanwhile, a report came of Abu Raqwa’s movement towards Alexandria. Fazal sent a detachment at the command of Qabil to intercept the rebels, and prevent them from reaching the city. The two armies met in Dhat al-Hamam in Alexandria, where Abu Raqwa won a victory over Qabil. Thence, Abu Raqwa resumed his march towards Alexandria. He besieged it for several months, provoking extreme alarms in Cairo, and a large force had been dispatched from Cairo in command of Fazal bin Saleh. Abu Raqwa failed to capture Alexandria, so he turned towards Cairo. He reached at Fayyum and camped to plan the final blow against the Fatimids. Imam al-Hakim raised reinforcement of four thousand horsemen at the command of Ali bin Falah to Jiza to prevent Abu Raqwa’s troops from raiding areas close to Cairo. Knowing this, Abu Raqwa sent a division of his troops which ambushed Ali bin Falah, killed many of his men. Skirmishes between the two forces continued until they finally met at Ra’s al-Barqa in Fayyum district.

It should be noted that a secret pact between Abu Raqwa and the Bedouin chiefs in the Fatimid forces had stipulated that when he would attack, they would withdraw from Fazal bin Saleh’s side to create fear and confusion. Fazal was fully aware of this, and on the day of the battle, he summoned all the Bedouin chiefs to his tent. When the attack took place, the Bedouin chiefs, being the prisoners virtually in Fazal’s tent, were unable to play their part in accord with the pact with Abu Raqwa, and their troops, unaware of their masters’ pact with Abu Raqwa, fought fiercely. Expecting a victory, the troops of Abu Raqwa were easily ambushed and defeated, and he himself fled to the south, and then to Nubia, a large country stretching from Aswan to Khartoum, and from Red Sea to the Libyan desert Abu Raqwa reached at Dumqula, the capital of Nubia, where he pretended to be an ambassador of the Fatimid at the court of the Nubian king. Fazal followed close behind to the Nubian frontier and managed to find out Abu Raqwa, and took him prisoner in 397/1004. He was brought to Cairo, and was paraded through the streets. Ibn Qalanisi (d. 555/1160) writes in Tarikh-i Dimashq (p. 65) that Abu Raqwa had written a poetical letter to Imam al-Hakim, begging him for mercy, but the Imam refused pardon. But al-Musabbihi (d. 420/1029) as quoted by Makrizi in Itti’az (p. 396) however refutes it and suggests that Imam al-Hakim intended to pardon Abu Raqwa as Imam al-Hakim had personally told him while talking about Abu Raqwa, "I did not want to kill him and what happened to him was not of my choosing." Ibn Athir (9:84) writes that, "Abu Raqwa died from humiliation and the cruel treatment during the parade, but was not executed." It transpires that Imam al-Hakim did not wish to execute him and was waiting the termination of the parade to grant him mercy, but he was died.

In 398/1005, the Nile rising only 16 yards and 16 fingers flow with the result that there was a great rise in prices and hardship. The single bread (al-khubz) became so dear that it could be obtained with great difficulty. It was followed by disease and plague together with malnutrition. Imam al-Hakim immediately exempted the taxes and formulated strict measures to cope with the situation and instituted death penalty for those who inflated prices or hoarded commodities, which produced the desired effect very soon.

Created by Arab tribes in Palestine, headed by Mufraj bin Dagfal al-Jarrah Taiy, Imam al-Hakim had to face another rebellion hatched in 397/1004, which lasted for about three years. This was the rebellion of the tribe of Banu Jarrah, a part of the Yameni tribe, called Taiy, who had settled in southern parts of Palestine in the Balqa region. Unlike the revolt of Abu Raqwa, Mufraj’s rising was not influenced by religious teaching, nor was it a serious threat to the Fatimids. He began to plunder the pilgrims, and planned to occupy Palestine to establish his family rule. In 400/1009, Imam al-Hakim appointed his general Yarkhtagin to Aleppo to suppress the rebellions, but Mufraj intercepted him at Askalan and raided. Mufraj sacked his materials and captured him. The rebels also occupied Ramla. Mufraj went to Hijaz and swore allegiance to Hasan bin Jafar (d. 430/1038), surnamed Abul Fatuh as an amir, and brought him to Ramla.

Thus, Mufraj dominated both in Palestine and Hijaz, and started coinage in the name of Abul Fatuh. Imam was much alarmed by these events in his state and tried to suppress the rebellion before it assumed serious proportions. He wrote a letter of remonstration to Mufraj and offered him a sum of 50,000 dinars in return for the safety of Yarkhtagin. Imam al-Hakim also threatened him with severe consequences if he harmed his general. Soon afterwards, the Fatimid general Yarkhtagin had been executed.

To discredit Abul Fatuh in Mecca and regain Hijaz, Imam al-Hakim communicated with another in Mecca, known as Ibn Abu Tayyib and helped him, resulting re-occupation of Hijaz by the Fatimid. Imam al-Hakim wrote to Mufraj, promising him estates and other gifts if he would cease from rebellion. Mufraj resolved to abandon Abul Fatuh, who returned to Hijaz. Meanwhile, Mufraj accepted the offer of Imam al-Hakim and took his money. He however retained his mastery over Palestine and continued to menace the peace and security. The pilgrims from Egypt could no longer travel to Hijaz to perform hajj as their caravans were used to be sacked. Imam al-Hakim was impelled to take field against Mufraj. In 404/1013, he sent 20,000 horsemen under Ali bin Falah, whom he invested the title qutb ad-dawla (magnate of the state), and ordered the chief of Damascus to join the campaign. Meanwhile, Mufraj died and his supporters scattered. Ali bin Falah captured Ramla and restored law and order.

After suppression of revolts, Imam al-Hakim’s administration became very liberal. The rebellions and the risings during his period had badly shaken the commercial life in Egypt by the fluctuation of the dhiram. In 395/1004, the market value of one dinar became equal to 26 dhirams. In 397/1006, the same problem occurred and one dinar valued equal to 34 dhirams. To cope with the monetary problem, new dhirams had been minted for circulation and the old ones withdrawn. The official value of a new dhiram was fixed at the rate 18 pieces to the dinar. The people were given three days to exchange the coins. This method controlled the monetary system to great extent.

In Egypt, the prices of merchandise, like units of measures and weight were not under direct control of the rule. This resulted price inflation and the people were at the mercy of the shopkeepers and merchants, profiteering high prices, therefore, Imam al-Hakim stabilized the units of weight and measure and fixed the price under government control. In 395/1004, an ordinance was issued to this effect, commanding the stabilization of the units and threatening those who deliberately mishandled them. In 397/1006, the prices of certain commodities were fixed. Severe punishment was inflicted upon the shopkeepers and merchants, who infringed these rules and also paraded in the streets who disobeyed these ordinances.

The relaxation in tax appears to have been an important feature in Imam al-Hakim’s reformations. During the years of low Nile, which affected agriculture, the land-owners were exempted from paying imposts and taxes. Sometimes, certain areas were declared tax-free zones and at other times it covered the whole country. All the important commodities were relaxed from taxation along with local industries, such as silk, soap and refreshments.

The agriculture in Egypt used to be a target of the scanty of water during bad Nile and the loss of cattle from epidemics, therefore, Imam al-Hakim had taken important measures to reduce the problem as much as possible. He ordered water courses and troughs to be cleaned regularly. In 403/1013, he expended 15,000 dinars for the cleaning of the canal of Alexandria. He also employed Ibn al-Haytham, a famous engineer from Basra to solve the problem of low Nile. To ensure the supply of cattle for agriculture purpose, Imam al-Hakim ordered that cows should not be slaughtered except on occasions of religious festivals or if they were unfit to pull the plough. Ibn Taghri Birdi (d. 874/1470) writes in al-Nujum al-Zahira fi Muluk Misr wa al-Qahira (Cairo, 1929, 4:252) that, "His food laws like the slaughtering of safe and healthy cows, which was limited to perpetuate the cattle breed, and the killing of all dogs in the country were promulgated for sanitary purposes."

Imam al-Hakim also granted most of the state land to his subjects and it was not only officials and friends who benefited the facility, but any person who petitioned for his aids. He also curtailed the expenses of the palaces and confiscated most of the properties of his family members, notably of his mother and sisters and added them to the state treasury in 399/1009.

Imam al-Hakim’s forbidding extravagant spending in entertainments when the Nile was exceptionally low and his fight against profiteering from high prices during the famine crisis are examples of sensible legislation for the public welfare. Ibn Taghri Birdi also discusses at some length Imam al-Hakim’s charitable and university endowments; his leniency with taxation, depending on the ability of people and commensurate with the prosperity of Egypt over a particular year (op. cit., 4:180).

There are also other noteworthy reforms of Imam al-Hakim in Egypt. "Nudity in public baths" says Makrizi in his Itti’az al-Hunafa (Cairo, 1948, p. 391), "was prohibited and people were ordered to wear towel around the waist." In 397/1006, Makrizi adds, a decree (manshur) was read, commanding the fixation of prices of bread, meat and other commodities. According to The Renaissance of Islam (Patna, 1937, p. 399), "The Caliph al-Hakim, who sought to restore the original Islam, enacted stringent measures against wine-drinking. When his Christian physician, Ibn Anastas prescribed wine and music for his melancholy, the people reverted with joy to the old vice. But the physician soon died and the Caliph became a yet greater opponent of alcohol. He even forbade the sale of raisins and honey and destroyed the casks wherein wine was kept."

Makrizi further writes in his al-Khitat (2:285) that, "He enforced an Islamic law forbidding the making, selling and drinking of wine. A total and complete enforcement of this law never exercised by any Muslim caliph but Imam al-Hakim was determined to enforce it." In 402/1012, Imam al-Hakim had forbidden the use of beer under a decree (manshur), and according to Ibn Khallikan (3:450), "The usual law against wine was strictly enforced. Now he forbade the sale of dried raisins because they were used by some for making wine. He forbade their importation into the country, and ordered all found in stores to be destroyed, in consequence of which some 2340 boxes of dried raisins were burned, the value being put at 500 pieces of gold. He next forbade the sale of fresh grapes, exceeding four pounds at a time; in any markets, and strict prohibition was made against squeezing out the juice. The grapes found on sale were confiscated, and either trodden in the street or thrown into the Nile. The vine at Gizeh was cut down and oxen employed to tread the fruit into the mire. Orders were issued that the same was to be done throughout the provinces. But honey as well as grapes can be used in preparing fermented liquor, so the Caliph’s seal was affixed to the stores of honey at Gizeh, and some 5051 jars of honey were broken and their contents poured into the Nile, as well as 51 cruises of date honey."

De Lacy O’Leary quotes an example in this context in A Short History of the Fatimid Khilafat (London, 1923, pp. 165-6) that a certain merchant had all his money invested in the prohibited fruit, and lost everything by the seizure and destruction of his goods. He appeared before the qadi and summoned Imam al-Hakim to appear and make good the destruction caused by his officials. The Caliph appeared to answer the charge preferred against him, the qadi treating him like any other citizen against whom complaint had been lodged. The merchant asked for compensation to the amount of 1000 pieces of gold. Imam al-Hakim in his defence said that the fruits destroyed were intended to be used in the preparation of drinks forbidden by the law of Holy Koran, but that if the merchant will answer that they were not intended for this purpose, but only to be eaten he was willing to pay their price. The merchant swore that the fruit was intended only for eating. He then received the money and gave the Caliph a formal receipt. When the case was concluded, the qadi, who had upto this point treated both parties as ordinary suitors, rose from his seat and gave the Caliph the salute customary at court. Imam al-Hakim admired the qadi’s conduct, and made him valuable presents in recognition of his treatment of the case.

The historians concur that the life of frivolity in Egypt seems to have been against the principles of Imam al-Hakim, and according to Antaki (p. 202), "He banned the profession of singers and dancers in Egypt." He also forbade unveiled women to follow a funeral, prohibiting the weeping and howling and procession of mourning women with drums and pipes. Thus, the tearing of clothes, the blackening of faces and clipping of hair were forbidden and women, employed for lamenting the dead, were imprisoned. O’Leary writes that, "No doubt the nocturnal festivities of Cairo, well suited to the pleasure loving character of the Egyptians, led to many abuses, and so in 391/1001 a strict order was issued, forbidding women to go out of doors by night, and a little later this was followed by a general order prohibiting the opening of the shops by night." (op. cit., p. 133)

Imam al-Hakim always protected the Islamic interest like his ancestors. Ibn al-Muqaffa in Tarikh Batarikat al-Kanisa al-Misriyya (2:125) and Bar Hebraeus in Chronographia (London, 1923, p. 184) state that Imam al-Hakim threatened those who did not follow Islam and honoured those who did. Ibn Khallikan (3:451) writes that, "In 408/1017, al-Hakim forbade the kissing of the ground in his presence and annulled the prayer made for him in the khutba and in the writings addressed to him. Instead of that prayer, they were ordered to employ these words: Salutation to the Commander of the Faithful."

In Egypt, Imam al-Hakim thus is reported to have removed the differences of the Shi’a and Sunni Muslims. Ibn Khallikan (3:450) writes that, "He gave orders that the persons who uttered curses against the Companions should be flogged and paraded ignominiously through the streets." Antaki (p. 195) writes that, "He publicly praised the Companions of the Prophet and commanded his subjects to do the same." In sum, the Sunni and Shi’a enjoyed toleration and equal rights. Many Sunni jurists were also employed in the Dar al-Hikmah and the appointment of a Sunni qadi, called Abul Abbas bin Awam Hanbali is best example in this context. In 400/1009, Imam al-Hakim also established a school of law offering instructions in the Malikite rite, whose incharge was Abu Bakr Antaki.

Imam al-Hakim restored peace and prosperity in the country, attracting the Muslims of Baghdad and Cordova to settle in Cairo. He brought the Fatimid rule to its zenith. Dr. G. Kheirallah writes in Druze History (Detroit, 1952, p.160) that, "During the life and reign of al-Hakim, the Fatimite Egypt reached its highest position of influence and prestige - no other state could then vie with Egypt for power, wealth or enlightenment; the Arabian art and crafts were at their zenith, and affluence and ease became the lot of the Egyptians". According to Antaki (d. 458/1065) in Tarikh-i Antaki (Beirut, 1909, p. 206), “Al-Hakim provided such kind of justice that his subjects had never known before. They slept in their homes secured in the possession of their properties." Ibn Ayyas (d. 930/1524) writes in Bada’i al-Zuhur (Cairo, 1896, 1:52) that, "His justice became the favourite theme of both writers of story and myth as well as poets. Much of their works, praising and picturing al-Hakim as the champion of justice, shows the impression his rule left on people’s imaginations." Al-Hakim adopted severity in observance of Islamic law, which enormously helped to reduce crimes. Ibn al-Zafir (d. 613/1216) writes in al-Duwal al-Munqatia (p. 59) that, "At times of prayers, the shopkeepers would have their shops open and unguarded without fear of theft." Ibn Ayyas (op. cit., p. 54) reports a story of a man who lost his purse full of money in the street of Cairo, and when, after few days, he passed the same street, he found it untouched. None dare to touch it for fear of al-Hakim’s punishment. There is an Egyptian fragment of Hebrew writing, evidently from Imam al-Hakim’s period, praising and eulogizing his unparalled justice with sincerity, vide Dr. A. Neubauer’s Egyptien Fragment (FQR, IX, pp. 24-6).

Dr. Sadik Assad writes in The Reign of al-Hakim bi-Amrallah (Beirut, 1974, p. 86) that, "Al-Hakim also built more mosques than any of his predecessors and perhaps, more than any other Muslim caliph." He extended his benefactions to all the existing mosques, and was responsible for the building of many more. The mosque near the Bab al-Futuh, commenced by his father in 380/990 had been left incomplete. Al-Hakim completed it and made it the second congregational mosque of Cairo, known as al-Anwar. Making no distinction between public treasury and personal funds, he made lavish gifts to the mosques of Fustat and Cairo. He furnished the mosque known as Hakim’s Mosque with lamps, mats and other requirements at a cost of 5000 pieces of gold. He presented to the old mosque at Fustat a candelabrum with 1200 lights which weighed 100,000 dhirams. So huge was his grant that in carrying it to the mosque, the road had to be dug, and the upper part of the door had to be removed to carry it into the mosque. This present was taken in a procession with the commander-in-chief in the front with drums and trumpets and amidst shouts of tehlil (no might save God) and takbir (God is Great). He also presented the mosque 1290 copies of Holy Koran, some of which were written in letters of gold. He also built a huge mosque near the Muqattam hills and presented to it carpets, curtains and lamps. He also furnished various mosques the items like the copies of the Koran, silver lamps, mats, curtains etc." Makrizi also writes in Itti’az (p. 496) that Imam al-Hakim generously allocated 9220 dhirams each month for the upkeep of the mosques.

The Abbasid caliph Kadir billah (d. 422/1031) got his rule dwindling before his eyes. He saw Baghdad yielding its position of prestige as the seat of culture and science to Cairo, and he found himself a virtual prisoner of the Buwahids, while the Fatimid Imam al-Hakim was ruling powerfully and absolutely. Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597/1200) writes in al-Muntazam fi Tarikh al-Muluk (Hyderabad, 1840, 7:237) that, "The Shi’a of Iraq had looked to al-Hakim as their desired Caliph in 398/1008 in Baghdad, and during a quarrel with the Sunnis, they shouted slogans, Ya Hakim, Ya Mansur in favour of al-Hakim." In 401/1010, Mutamad ad-Dawla Qirwash bin Maqallid (d. 444/1052), the chief of the Uqayl tribe and governor of Mosul, Madain, Anbar and Kufa acknowledged the Fatimid Caliphate instead of the Abbasids, and started the Fatimid khutba and coinage. In the same year, Ali bin Mazid Asadi (d. 408/1018), the chief of the Asad tribe also proclaimed his loyalty to Imam al-Hakim and had the Fatimid khutba read in Hilla and the districts he governed.

The Abbasid caliph Kadir billah alarmed over the prosperity of Egypt and growing influence of the Fatimids inside his empire, therefore, he attempted to combat with Imam al-Hakim by another cowardice tool. He gathered a number of Shi’a and Sunni theologians and jurists to his court in 402/1011 and ordered them to prepare a forged manifesto that the Fatimid claim of Alid descent was false. Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406) writes in Muqaddimah (tr. Franz Rosenthal, London, 1958, 1:45-6) that, "The judges in Baghdad eventually prepared an official statement denying the Alid origin (of the Fatimids). The statement was witnessed by a number of prominent men, among them the Sharif ar-Radi and his brother al-Murtada, and Ibn al-Bathawi. Among the religious scholars were Abu Hamid al-Isfarayini, al-Quduri, as-Saymari, Ibn al-Akfani, al-Abiwardi, the Shi’a jurist Abu Abdullah bin an-Numan, and other prominent Muslims in Baghdad. The event took place one memorable day in the year 402/1011 in the time of (the Abbasid caliph) al-Qadir. The testimony was based upon heresy, on what people in Baghdad generally believed. Most of them were partisans of the Abbasids who attacked the Alid origin (of the Fatimids). The historians reported the informations as they had heard it. They handed down to us just as they remembered it. However, the truth lies behind it. Al-Mutadid’s letter concerning Ubaydallah (al-Mahdi) to Aghlabid in al-Qayrawan and the Midrarid in Sijilmasah, testifies most truthfully to the correctness of the origin (of the Fatimids) and proves it most clearly. Al-Mutadid was better qualified than anyone else to speak about the genealogy of the Prophet’s house." Ibn Taghri Birdi (d. 874/1470) writes in his al-Nujum al-Zahira fi Muluk wa al-Qahira (Cairo, 1929, 4:236) that, "The Abbasid caliph hired theologians and paid them large sum of money to write books condemning the Fatimid cause and their doctrine." We have three accredited Sunni historians, Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), Abul Fida (1273-1331) and Makrizi (1363-1442), who were not under the pressure or influence of either the Abbasids or the Fatimids. These historians concur that the Fatimids of Egypt were the direct descendants of Ali and Fatima. The Abbasid false propaganda, however, discrediting the Fatimid lineage has been falsified through accredited sources and arguments.

Amid the surging splendour, Imam al-Hakim emerges as an unusual personality judged by any standard. He founded Dar al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom), also known as Dar al-Ilm (House of Knowledge) in 395/1004. The majalis al-hikmah were interrupted in 400/1010 for some reasons in Dar al-Hikmah. It was reopened very soon, but cancelled once again in 401/1010. It was again interrupted for the third time at the end of the year 405/1015 after the nomination of Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Awam as a chief qadi.

Sami Hamarneh writes in Medicine and Pharmacy under the Fatimids (cf. Ismaili Contribution to Islamic Culture ed. by Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Tehran, 1977, p. 163) that, "It seems plausible to speculate that the generosity of al-Hakim towards scholars and scientists had attracted the migration to Fatimid Egypt of eminent figure, Abu Ali Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Haytham (Latin Alhazen) of Basra in southern Iraq." Ibn al-Haytham (354-429/965-1039), the greatest physicist was born in Basra, and was originally appointed to a civil post at Basra. He was avidly consumed by the desire to learn mathematics and philosophy, for which he could not get spare time in his post, therefore, he feigned madness and was dismissed as a result from the post. Our informations about his pre-Egyptian days are deficient, but according to a few accounts of his life, it is known that he managed to leave Basra in order to proceed to Egypt, where he had been invited by the Fatimid Imam al-Hakim.

It must be known that in the summer following the rainy reason, the Nile river and the canals overflow with water, causing millions of tons of fertile silt, containing phosphoric acid, potash and nitrogen. But in the winter, the level of water fell down, making the cultivation of the crops impossible, and in annual inundation it used to cause devastation of life and property. With his brilliant mind, the famous physicist and the founder of the science of optics, Abu Ali Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin al-Haytham came to the conclusion in Iraq that if some of the surplus water available immediately after the rains, could be stored, not only could it be used in the dry season for more cultivation of land, but it would also help to prevent the periodic flood inflicting heavy damage. According to Ibn Abi Usaibia (d. 668/1270) in his Uyn al-Anba fi tabakat al-Attiba (2:91), Ibn al-Haytham had also claimed that, "Had I been in Egypt I could have done something to regulate the Nile, so that the people could derive benefit at its ebb and flow." Thus, he prepared a plan to build a three-way embankment dam near Aswan for harnessing the Nile waters, and sent his report to Imam al-Hakim. He even suggested for a site near Aswan where the river emerged from a gorge into the flat country. Haidar Bammate writes in Muslim Contribution to Civilization (Lahore, 1981, p. 21) that, "Al-Haytham was the first to advocate the construction of a dam at Aswan to raise the level of the Nile."

Imam al-Hakim was deeply impressed when he received the outline of the project and sent one of his emissaries with adequate funds to Ibn al-Haytham in Basra and invited him to Cairo. He readily accepted the royal invitation and after a short stay in Cairo, he was sent up the river with a large sum of money and retinue of workers. He undertook the journey to Aswan, which is situated at a distance of over 400 miles to the south of Cairo as the crow flies. He inspected the site at Aswan and came to the conclusion that such a colossal scheme of works was not feasible under the working conditions. According to Ibn Abi Usaibia, "He saw the pyramids at first glance and became awed by the engineering and geometrical skills of the ancients. Had it been possible he thought, the ancient Egyptians must have done it before." (op. cit., 2:91). Having realized the enormous magnitude of the project, he failed to execute it with the technical means he had at his disposal. Instead therefore of undertaking the start-up of the projected dam, he returned to Cairo and confessed to Imam al-Hakim his sheer inability to go ahead with the proposed plan.

Imam al-Hakim assigned him some office pertaining to revenue, but he is said to have feigned madness, and retired to a place near al-Azhar university. Different stories have been advanced to discredit the personality of Imam al-Hakim in this context. Prof. Abdul Ghafur writes in Ibn al-Haitham (cf. Ibn al-Haitham, Karachi, 1970, pp. 111-2) that, "From this, it should be obvious that, even after Ibn al-Haitham’s inability to go ahead with the plan for construction of the dam at Aswan, al-Hakim had considerable respect for Ibn al-Haitham. It might be that there were monetary difficulties involved in the implementation of the scheme or some other snag. However, the reputation of Ibn al-Haitham remain unscathed in this affair. The plea of insanity was not new to Ibn al-Haitham. He had used this subterfuge once before at Basra. It is therefore plausible to assume that he adopted this ruse in order to devote himself to studies. Qifti, Baihiqi and Ibn Abi Usaibia unanimously held that Ibn al-Haitham was a self-contented person and devoid of avarice or worldly self-aggrandizement."

Baihiqi however wrongly narrates in his Timat al-Sawan al-Hikmat that Ibn al-Haytham steathily left Cairo at the dead night and lived in Syria. This narration contradicts the established fact that he lived in Cairo till his death. The story of the flight of Ibn al-Haytham from Cairo for fear of execution by Imam al-Hakim is the fabrication of the historians. Had he known of his murder, he would have fled from Aswan and never came to Cairo. He however spent the last 19 years of his life in scientific pursuits and experimental research under the shadow of the domes and arches of al-Azhar university, and composed almost 209 books on mathematics, astronomy, physics, philosophy and medicine of which the most celebrated is his Kitab al-Manazir (treatise on optics), which was translated into Latin by Witelo in 1270 and published by Frederick Risner in 1572 at Basel. This was the first comprehensive treatise on optics in the world and immensely influenced the writings of Witelo, Peckham, Roger Bacon, Leonardo de Vinici and John Kepler. He is the first to have discussed the anatomy of the eye. He also discussed the propagation of light and colours, optic illusions and reflection, with experiments for testing the angles of incidence and reflection. Theorically he had almost discovered magnifying lenses through his experiments, which came into existence in Italy three centuries later. For the first time Ibn al-Haytham offered a correct explanation for the apparent increase in the size of the sun and the moon when near the horizon. His another remarkable achievement is his employment of the camera obscura.

Another notable figure was Ali bin Yunus, the great mathematician and astronomer, who invented pendulum and the sun-dial, for whom Imam al-Hakim had the observatory built on Jabal al-Muqattam.

According to Encyclopaedia of World Art (Rome, 1958, 5:367) that, "Rice correctly read the Arabic text carved on it, which does not simply banal good wishes to the owner of the ewer as was previously thought, but says that the ewer was made for the personal use of al-Hakim’s commander."

It will be further interesting to note that Abul Kassim Ammar bin Ali al-Mausili was the most important eye-surgeon in Cairo, and acquired great prestige under the patronage of Imam al-Hakim. He compiled al-Muntakhab fi ilm al-Ayn wa Mudawatiha bi’l Adwiya wal Hadid in 400/1010. It deals the anatomy and physiology of the eye, its diseases and treatment by drugs and surgery. To avoid the dangers of using a breakable glass tube referred to in Greek writings, Ammar invented a hollowed metallic needle used successfully in cataract operations.

Imam al-Hakim had installed an astronomical observatory on Jabal al- Muqattam, near Cairo for Ibn Younus. According to Ibn Khallikan, Imam al-Hakim went out late in the night of 27th Shawal, 411/February 13, 1021 to Jabal al-Muqattam and did not return to the palace. A tracking party was sent out, who found an ass on the top of the hill with its forelegs hacked off. Blood marks on the ground led to a spot, where they found Imam al-Hakim’s clothes pierced by daggers and buttoned up, and as such his death was officially declared on 10th Zilhaja, 411/April 4, 1021. The Druzes however believed that Imam al-Hakim did not die but disappeared, anticipating his return on dooms-day. Makrizi (2:290) quotes one other tradition about Imam al-Hakim’s death on the authority of Abul Mahsin that in 415/1025, a man from Imam Hussain’s family had been arrested after raising up rebellion in the southern part of upper Egypt. He confessed that it was he who had killed Imam al-Hakim. He said that there were four accomplices of the crime, and that they afterwards fled to different parts. He also showed a piece of cotton with which he had been clothed.

Imam al-Hakim died at the age of 36 years and 7 months after the Imamate and Caliphate of 25 years and 1 month. He had two sons, al-Harith (395-400/1004-1009) and Ali Abul Hasan, surnamed az-Zahir. He had also a daughter, Sit al-Misr (d. 455/1063).

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral Hal gujareEncyclopedia Topic

Attend, fulfil the responsibility

Various Sources Hal gujareEncyclopedia Topic

Participates in the jamat, lives life

Various Sources Hal vaekeEncyclopedia Topic

According to the time, according to the Farman

Various Sources HALAL WA HARAMEncyclopedia Topic

The words halal means lawful, allowed or permitted, and haram means unlawful, forbidden or prohibited, and cognate terms from the trilateral roots h-l-l and h-r-m respectively, most often designate these two categories and are of relatively frequent occurrence. The Koranic declaration of lawfulness or unlawfulness are limited to a relatively few areas of the law as later elaborated by the jurists. Apart from denoting lawfulness, the root h-l-l indicates an exit from the ritual state connected with the pilgrimage and re-entry into the profane state (idha halal-tun) (5:2). The most common means for indicating lawfulness in the Koran is to use the causative verb ahalla means to make lawful, usually with God as the subject: "He makes the good things lawful for them" (7:157), but it is sometimes passive (5:1) concerning certain livestock. In one instance it occurs in the first person plural, in an address to the Prophet (33:50). Very occasionally, people are made the subject of this verb, to suggest that they wrongly deem something lawful (9:37), though words derived from h-r-m are more common in such accusations. It should be noted that the intransitive verb halla (to be lawful) occasionally appears in the negative to indicate that something is not lawful (2:230), providing that one's wife ceases to be lawful after divorce. The Koran also employs the adjectives hill and halal to indicate lawfulness (5:5, 8:69) respectively about certain foods.

Words derived from the root h-r-m not only connote God's making something unlawful but also frequently express the idea of sacredness, such as al-shahr al-haram (the sacred month) (2:194) or al-haram (the sacred precinct, where the Kaba is located) (28:57); hurum (persons in the ritual state associated with pilgrimage) (5:1) and hurumat (sacred ordinances) (2:194, 22:30). The h-r-m derived counterpart to ahalla is the causative verb harrama (to make unlawful), and as in the case of the former, God is frequently its subject (2:173). The Koran does not employ an intransitive verb derived from h-r-m, making do instead with the passive of harrama (5:3), and the related passive participle (6:145), the corresponding participial form from ahalla is not found in the Koran. A number of passages use harrama in the first person plural and in most of these God recounts how He had previously made certain things, especially foods, unlawful for the Jews (4:160, 6:146, 16:118, 28:12). The counterpart of the adjective halal is haram, though they only appear together twice (10:59, 16:116). There is no h-r-m derived equivalent to the form hill but in 21:95, the Kufan tradition of variant readings substitutes the word hirm for haram. Later legal theorists paired hill with the non-Koranic term hurma, vide Fakhruddin Razi's Mahsul (1:15).

Certain other terms in the Koran also connote lawfulness and unlawfulness. A number of passages use the word junah (sin): “It is not a sin for you to…” (2:198) as an indirect means of describing lawful activities. Commentators gloss the word hijr as meaning haram in two passages. In 6:138, unnamed persons declare certain produce and livestock hijr, which means that it was declared haram in connection with a pagan rite, vide Tabari’s Tafsir (12:139-140). In 25:22, the phrase hijr mahjur appears in the following sentence: “On the day they see the angels, there will be no glad things then for the wrongdoers, and they will say hijran mahjuran.” The commentators attribute the phrase in question to the angels and gloss it as meaning haram muharram, that is, either paradise or the glad tidings will be strictly forbidden to the wrongdoers, vide Baidawi’s Anwar (2:37), and the word hijr appears alone in 89:5, where it is traditionally understood to mean intelligence. The word suht appears in 5:42 and twice at 5:62-3, always in the phrase “eaters/eating of suht” (akkaluna lil-suhti, aklihimu l-suhta), an apparently reference to the Jews.

What is halal and haram?

"The Koranic declaration of lawfulness and unlawfulness pertain mostly to ritual, dietary and family laws. For example, it declares (5:96) the hunting of land animals while in the ritual state for the pilgrimage to have been outlawed (hurima), but fishing and eating the catch lawful (uhilla). In regard to dietary matters, the most prominent and oft-repeated rule provides that God has made unlawful (harama) carrion, blood, swine flesh and what is consecrated to other than God (2:173, 16:115; and with slight variations at 5:3 and 6:145). The largest number of rules that use this rubric concern family law (4:22-4), for example, deals which women have been made unlawful (hurrimat) to marry and which lawful (uhilla). Another note-worthy principle of Islamic commercial law (2:275) provides that God made lawful (ahalla) sales transactions and forbade (harrama) usury.

In contrast to the many overtly legislative passages, which pronounce on lawfulness and unlawfulness, other passages employ the lawful/unlawful rubric to suggest that the Muslims are, perhaps, subject to fewer legal restrictions than previous communities. Several such passages use word derived from the root h-l-l and t-y-b to suggest that God has begun to expand the category of the lawful: “Today the good things (al-tayyibat) have been made lawful for you (uhilla lakum) (5:5; also vide 2:172-3) with h-r-m (5:4, 88; 7:157, 16:114). Other verses contain an implicit or explicit charge that certain human beings have mistakenly declared things lawful or unlawful. These fall into three main groups: those in which people are enjoined not to outlaw what God has provided (5:87, 6:140, 7:32, 10:59); those which generally complain that people have wrongly forbidden or made lawful unspecified things (6:148, 9:29, 16:35, 116; 66:1); and those in which people are accused of wrongly outlawing certain specified things, mostly in connection with pagan practices (6:138-50, 9:37).

Several passages use the lawful/unlawful rubric to suggest that the Jews laboured under a more burdensome law than the Muslims, either because the former created unnecessary rules (3:93) or because God wished to punish them (4:160, 6:146, 16:118). The process of repealing this more onerous law imposed on the Jews apparently begins with Jesus, who says in 3:50 that he has come as a confirmation of the Torah to make (li-uhilla) some of the thing, which had previously been forbidden (hurrima)."

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HalandeEncyclopedia Topic

Go, come

Various Sources HalanharoEncyclopedia Topic

Temporary, one which is bound to go away

Various Sources HalatraEncyclopedia Topic

This world

Various Sources HalhalkarEncyclopedia Topic

Confusion, disturbance, chaos

Various Sources HaliEncyclopedia Topic

Walk

Various Sources HaliyaEncyclopedia Topic

Walked

Various Sources HalkaraEncyclopedia Topic

Proclaimer, one who heralds, call, invitation

Various Sources HALLAJ, aL HUSSEIN B. MANSURName

(857-922) Persian mystic influenced by ismailis and decapitated for declaring"An-al Haqq - I am the truth"; studied and translated by Massignon.

(857-922.) Mystique persan influencé par et accusé d'être ismaélien et décapité pour avoir dit "An-al Haqq - je suis la Vérité". étudié et traduit par Massignon.

Heritage Dictionary of ismailism, entry #228general HaloEncyclopedia Topic

Walk

Various Sources HalseEncyclopedia Topic

WilI mix

Various Sources HamEncyclopedia Topic

Hope, desire, wish, courage

Various Sources HameraEncyclopedia Topic

My

Various Sources HAMIDUDDIN KIRMANIEncyclopedia Topic

"Hamiduddin Kirmani was born most probably in 352/933. His family hailed from Kirman as his name indicates, but it is not known where he was born. He first studied the esoteric science under Abu Yaqub al-Sijjistani (d. 360/971), and then went to Cairo for further studies.

He played some key roles in political and doctrinal matters. He lived at the time when conflict between the Fatimid and the Abbasid was rather serious. The title of his book, al-Majalis al-Baghdadiyyah wal Basariyyah suggests that gatherings were held where he taught Ismaili doctrines in Baghdad and Basra. He exercised some important mission works in Baghdad and Basra. In 380/990, his mission was able to gain support of the Uqayti princes of Mosul, known as al-Musayyib. He passed most part of his life as a hujjat al-Iraqin in Iraq and was expressly summoned in Cairo on 400/1009 for refuting the Druzes who propagated the divinity of al-Hakim. His fame does not stem only from being a pioneer da'i, but also from being one of the most distinguished philosophers and writers. He returned back to Iraq, where he completed his principal work, Rahat al-Aqal in 411/1020. The exact date of his death is unknown; but it appears that he was still living in 412/1021 and died soon. He also compiled some 39 important books on different subjects. In his al-Aqwal al-Dhahabiyyah (ed. Salah al-Sawy, Tehran, 1977, p. 1), Seyyed Hossein Nasr writes in its introduction that, "Hamid al-Din was a very prolific writer who must be considered as one of the most outstanding philosophers not only of Ismailism but also of Islam in general, a figure whose works have been singularly neglected until now by the world of scholarship in general and even by specialists of Islamic philosophy and theology." In sum, Kirmani has been called "the Shaikh of Ismaili philosophers", vide the introduction of Kamil Hussain and Mustapha Hilmi to Rahat al-Aqal (Cairo, 1952, p. 17).

Encyclopaedia of Ismailism by Mumtaz Ali Tajddingeneral HanEncyclopedia Topic

Loss, disadvantage, harm

Various Sources HanandaEncyclopedia Topic

Will rub, will repent

Various Sources