Evolution of the Authority of the Ulema

Initially during the Buyid control, it was considered by the Ulema that since the Imam had gone into Ghayabat (occultation) and there was no longer present his Naib-e-Khas (special representative), or four Babs, all the functions invested in the Imam had lapsed (became SAQIT).The principal functions of the Imam were considered to be:
1 Leadind the Holy War (jihad)

2 Divion of the Booty (qismat al –fay)

3 Leading the Friday Prayer (salaat al –juma)

4 Putting judicaial decisions into effect (tanfiz al-ahkaam)

5 Imposing legal penalities (iqmat al-hudud)

6 Receiving religious taxes Zakat and khums

This doctrine of lapse of the function of the occulted Imam was almost certainly very convenient politically at first as it served the interests of Buyids, since it established the Imami Shias as being non-revolutionary in sharp contrast with the Ismailis, who with their propaganda, were threatening to destabilize and overthrow the Buyids. On account of rapid change in political conditions in which Buyids were decimated, it soon became apparent that the situation caused by the concepts of SAQIT was extremely impractical and left the Imami community at a great disadvantage with no leadership, no organization and no financial structure. Sheikh ut Taifa (Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Hasan at Tusi 955CE -1067CE) was the first to reinterpret the doctrine so as to allow delegation of the Imam’s judicial authority to those who had studied fiqh. He considered the ulema as the best people to act as agents of the donor in distributing the religious taxes since they knew to whom it should be distributed. He allowed the fuqaha to organize the Friday prayers in the absence of the Imam or his Naib e-Khas, (ref.: an-Nihaya on fiqh), on this point Alamal Huda, Ibn Idris and Allama al –Hilli remained disagreed. Muhaqqiq al Hilli (Najud din Abul Qasim Jafar ibn Hasan, 1205CE-1277CE) extended the judicial role of the ulema to iqmat al-hudud . He was first to evolve the theory according to which fuqha from being deputies of the donor for the distribution of Khums and Zakat assumed the role of being the deputies of the Hidden Imam for the collection and distribution of the khums and Zakat, (Shara’i-al Islam). Muhaqqiq al Karaki (Nuruddin Ali ibn Abdul Ali al Amali 1465CE-1533CE) was first to suggested on the basis of hadis of Umar ibn Hanzala, that the ulema were the NAIB al- AMM-general representative of the Hidden Imam, with restriction to the duty of only leading Friday prayers,(ref: Jami al-Maqasid). It was the Shahid us Sani (Sheikh Zaynud-Din ibn Ali al-Amli al-Julabi 1506CE-1558CE), who took the concept of NAIB al- AMM to its logical conclusion and applied it to all of the religious functions and prerogatives of the Hidden Imam. Thus the judicial authority of the ulema now became a direct reflection of the authority of the Imam himself. It was now obligatory to pay the religious taxes directly to the ulema as the trustees of the Imam for distribution. In the field of defensive Jihad, he identified a role for the ulema. This gradual evolution of authority of ulema was controlled to be practiced due to strong position of Safavis (1500CE-1722CE.) It was left to the Qajar (1792-1945) period to bring most of these theoretical functions into practice. During the first Russio-Irania War (1804-13), Fatah Ali Shah’s son Abbass Mirza, obtained from Sheikh Jafar Kashiful Ghita (1743CE-1812CE) and other ulema of Najaf and Isfahan, a declaration of Jihad against the Russians and the state acknowledged ulema’s right to collect the religious tax of Khums. (ref: Kitab al-Jihadiya by Tabriz, 1818). Another eminent mujtahid Syed Muhammad Baqir Shafti (d. 1844CE) asserted iqamat al-hudud. He is said to have executed some seventy persons. (ref Tunukabuni’s Qisas al-ulama).

It is evident that by a process, comprising a period of about thousand years, exegesis and innovative interpretation, the ulema were able to effect theoretical consolidation of their authority but in such small stages as to make scarcely discernable and thus we have the impression of as having occurred no change at all. In this way Shii doctrines and principles had gone under tremendous modification by different hands.

A critical assessment of the process of this metamorphism is required and it would cover historical events, movements and other external and internal compulsions. There are umpteen issues associated with this process and the major concern is the violation and reversion of basic principle and doctrines. Now the castle appears erected on wrong foundation and we are forced to accept that basic beliefs are compromised. We are left with no other choice to believe that ulema were responding to social and economic realities around them.

KARABALA IS A SUN, WHICH SHINES WITH MANY LIGHTS,

IT IS A BOOK OF WISDOM WITH MANY COMMENTARIES.