The Akhb r s () are Twelver Sh a Muslims who reject the use of reasoning in deriving verdicts, and believe Qur'an and hadith (sayings of Prophet Muhammad and Twelve Shia Im ms) as the only source of law.^[1]

The term Akhb r (from khabara, news or report) is used in contrast to Us l (from a l, first principle). Unlike Us l s, Akhb r s do not follow marja s (models for imitation) who practice modern form of ijtihad (independent legal reasoning). Akhbari's argue that no Im ms ever allowed Ijtehad and the Door of Ijtehad was opened by Umar ibn al-Khattab.^[2][3]

Akhbari nowadays form a minority within Sh a Islam, with Us l s making up the majority. Akhb r sm "crystalized" as a distinct movement with the writings of Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi (d. 1627 AD) and achieved its greatest influence in the late Safavid and early post-Safavid era. However, shortly thereafter Muhammad Baqir Behbahani (d. 1792), along with other Usuli mujtahids, crushed the Akhbari movement.^[4] Today it is found primarily in the Basra area of southern Iraq where they form the majority in many districts, although no longer in the city. They are also found in the island nation of Bahrain,^[5] with reportedly "only a handful of Shi'i ulema" remaining Akhbari "to the present day."^[6] Furthermore, during the twentieth century a part of the Shiite community in the Indian city of Hyderabad declared to be Akhbari.^[7]

Similar phenomenon

Many, and this is subject to debate and controversy, may opine that the way the Akhbari Shi`ites state that they follow only the Koran and the Hadith and the Ahl al-Bayt is similar in some respects to how Salafis (called Wahhabis by some) or influenced groups such as the Ahl-e-Hadith or certain factions of the Muslim Brotherhood do not follow a Madhab but rather lay claim to following the Koran and the Hadith.

Others may even go further and compare both groups to Protestant Christianity and especially to the Puritans, many of whom wished to break away and "purify" the Church of England.

Background

Akhbaris are binded with Hadith of the two weighty things where Prophet Muhammad instructed to follow the Quran and Ahl al-Bayt. Therefore even for new events occurred during greater occultation Akhbaris continue to follow traditions of Ahlul Bayt, as per the saying of Muhammad al-Mahdi where he said As for the events, which will occur, turn to the narrators of our traditions, because they are my proof to you, while I am the proof of Allah to them ^[8] Akhbari reject fat wa based on ijtihad, they also reject the permissibility of writing exegesis of the Qur'an without quoting the narrations of the infallible Ahlu l-Bayt. Akhbari quote the Hadith ath-Thaqalayn and several authentic traditions of the Twelve Im ms to prohibit the practice of exegesis. Akhbaris do not believe in generalization of Hadith, they say that Hadith is either right or wrong;^[9] further they believe that Hadiths compiled in The Four Books of Shias are reliable. It is reported that Muhammad al-Mahdi acknowledged Kitab al-Kafi (which is among The Four Books of Shias) and said al-Kafi is sufficient for our Shia (followers) .^[10] Where Usulis doubt the credibility of this saying as author of Kitab al-Kafi never quoted the same.^[10] In short, the gist of Akhb r ideology is that nothing but the a ad th of the Infallibles can serve as authoritative evidence in Islam. Akhb r s also differ from Us l s in their rejection of the Guardianship of the Islamic Jurists, arguing that preachers of religion have no role in politics, as is evidenced by the lives of the Im ms and their followers.

Us lism evolved on the basis of Usul al-fiqh (the hypothetical concepts and perceptions of some scholars) centuries after the major occultation. Among the earliest Sh a ulam such as Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni and Ibn Babawaiyya, the most important activity was transmission of a ad th.^[11] At this time, the Sh a distinguished themselves from the Sunni in the category of law, which employed such methods as qiyas "analogical reasoning" and exegesis". However, the Sh a developed law directly from the traditions of the Im ms.^[11] Initially during the Buyid period, the Twelver ulam ' considered that since the Im m had gone into Occultation and his N 'ib al-Khass was no longer present, all the functions invested in the Im m had lapsed. The principal functions of the Im m had been:

1. Leading the Holy War (jihad)
2. Division of the booty (qismat al-fay)
3. Leading the Friday Prayer (salat al-juma)
4. Putting judicial decisions into effect (tanfidh al-ahkam)
5. Imposing legal penalties (iqamat al-hudud)
6. Receiving the religious taxes of zak t and khums.^[12]

However, it soon became apparent that the situation caused by the lapse of functions of the Hidden Im m was extremely impractical and left the Twelver Sh a community at a great disadvantage, with no leadership, no organization and no financial structure.^[12]

History

First transgression

As early as the 5th century A.H. / 11th century CE, more than 150 years after the Occultation of the 12th Im m, Shaykhu t-Ta'ifa reinterpreted the doctrine to allow delegation of the Im m's judicial authority to those who had studied fiqh. Although he implies in his writings that this function should only be undertaken by the ulama if there is no one else to do it.

Shaykhu t-Taifa considered the ulam ' the best agents of the donor to distribute religious taxes since they knew to whom it should be distributed. Nevertheless, individuals were free to do this themselves if they wished. He allowed fuqah to organize Friday prayers in absence of the Im m or his special representative. The prominent Sh a scholars who rejected this thesis were:

1. `Alam al-Huda
2. Ibn Idris
3. Allamah al-Hilli^[12]

It is to be noted that `Alam al-Huda was from among the Shaykhu t-Taifa's group.

Second transgression

By the 13th century, Muhaqqiq al-Hilli was able to advance these concepts very considerably. He extended the judicial role of the ulama to iqamat al-hudud the imposition of penalties by ulama themselves. In his writings it is possible to see the evolution in his thinking whereby the fuqah ' develop from the deputies of the donor for the distribution of religious taxes in his early writings to being the deputies of the Hidden Im m for collection and distribution of the taxes in his later works.^[13] In effect, transgressing the limits set by Shaykhu t-Taifa (two centuries earlier) in his first transgression.

Third transgression

Muhaqqiq al-Karkhi (About 300 years after the second transgression) was the first to suggest, arguing from the hadith of Umar ibn Hanzala, that the ulama were the N 'ib al-'Amm (general representative) of the Hidden Im m. But he restricted his application of this argument to the assumption of the duty of leading Friday prayers.^[13]

Fourth transgression

It was Shah d ath-Th n who took the concept of N 'ib al-'Amm to its logical conclusion in the religious sphere and applied it to all of the religious functions and prerogatives of the Hidden Im m. Thus the judicial authority of the ulam ' now became a direct reflection of the authority of the Im m himself. It was now obligatory to pay the religious taxes directly to the ulam ' as the trustees of the Im m for distribution and the donor who distributed these himself was considered to obtain no reward. This is in direct contradiction to limits set by prior transgressions.

Furthermore, Shah d ath-Th n extended the range of those eligible to receive money from zak t to include religious students and the ulam ' themselves, who thus became the recipients of the money as trustees of students. Even in the field of defensive jih d, Shah d ath-Th n identified a role for the ulam '. Only in the field of offensive jih d did he allow that the role of Hidden Im m had lapsed pending his return.^[13]

Although the aforementioned scholars were not mujtahids in their full capacity, they introduced innovative concepts into Sh a theology which later formed the basis of the exegetical school. Their innovations were sharply criticized by prominent Sh a scholars of their time and thus, remained mostly theoretical.

The traditional Sh a doctrine was, by its nature, fatal to leadership of any regime except that of Im m al-Mahdi since they believed that an Islamic state can be established only under the leadership of an infallible Im m. Thus, the Sh a had little role to play in supporting the decisions of the state, in contrast with the Sunni tendency of offering their full support to the Ottoman Empire.

This caused a great deal of paranoia to the states where the Sh a were in majority. By the end of Safavid era the situation had become intense due to the rise of imperialism on a global scale. It was necessary to develop an alternate ideology for the survival of Iranian state. This is when a group of ulam ' were encouraged to squeeze out the possibility of extending the state's control over the shia majority; by whatever means necessary.

The revival of Akhb rism, or "neo-Akhb rism" as it became known, was under the dean of Karbala scholarship, Yusuf Al Bahrani (1695 1772), who led an intellectual assault on Usuli thought in the mid-18th century. An Akhb r critique of Usulism had emerged in Bahrain at the beginning of the 18th century, partly spurred by the weaknesses of the Usuli sponsoring Safavid empire.^[14] By succeeding to the role of dean of Karbala as one of the pre-eminent scholars of the age, al-Bahrani's extended this Bahrain-based debate to the rest of the Sh a world.

Bihbahani

Under al-Bahrani, Usuli scholarship was considered impure but Bahrani was not politically influential, although his student, the famous Sheikh Al-Hurr al-Aamili in his book Amal al-amil writes "He was a mountain and ocean of knowledge, No one from among the previous scholars preceded his knowledge or reached his status". It was Muhammad Baqir ibn Muhammad Akmal al-Wahid Bihbahani who challenged and defeated (by use of physical force, his militia called mirghadabs) the Akhbaris and eventually became the most politically influential cleric in Karbala in 1772. Bihbahani's theology was not welcomed by the Akhbaris. Although this controversy had begun as a minor disagreement on a few points, it eventually grew into a bitter, vituperative dispute culminating in Bihbahani's declaration that the Akhb r s were infidels(Kuffar).^[6] However, the dispute remained purely intellectual.

At first there was a large population of Akhb r activists at the shrine cities of Iraq but it was Bihbahani who, at the end of 18th century, reversed this and completely routed the Akhb r s at Karbala and Najaf. South Iraq, Bahrain and a few cities in Iran such as Kirman remained Akhb r strongholds for a few more decades but eventually the Usuli triumph was complete and only a handful of Sh a ulam ' remained Akhb r to the present day.^[6]

After the theological coup brought about by al-Wahid Bihbahani by military methods, the Usuli school became instrumental to the Iranian regime.

Fifth transgression

During the first Russo-Persian War (1804-1813), Fath Ali Shah's son and heir, Abbas Mirza, who was conducting the campaign, turned to the new ulama and obtained from Shaykh Ja'far Kashif al-Ghita' and other eminent clerics in Najaf and Isfahan a declaration of jihad against the Russians, thus implicitly recognizing their authority to issue such a declaration one of the functions of the Hidden Im m. Kashif al-Ghita used the opportunity to extract from the state acknowledgment of the ulama's right to collect the religious taxes of Khums. ."^[15]

This followed the pattern of other transgressions by overthrowing the limits of its prior (fourth) transgression.

Iranian Revolution

Following the Iranian Revolution, the Us l school has gained popularity among previously Akhb r communities.^[5]

Rejection of the Mujtahids

Akhb r s reject and even curse mujtahids. They practice this based on the last letter Im m Mahdi wrote to Al ibn Muhammad, fourth deputy of the Lesser Occultation. In the letter, Im m Zaman said:

Akhb r s claim that only the Im ms may be described as yat Allahs (Ayatollahs, "signs of God") based on the Hadith-i Tariq, and that no one else has the right to ascribe this divine title to themselves. For example, the Hadith-i Tariq says: Historically it was only in the early 19th century that ordinary mujtahids began to describe themselves as 'Ayatollahs.'

Debate

Pro-Akhb r

1. It can be noticed that the Usuli ulama have usurped one by one all the functions of the Hidden Im m, virtually ascribing themselves with his Im mate.
2. Since Bahbahani's coup, the Usuli ulama have made countless transgressions from Wilayat al-Faqih to Ittihad Bayn al-Muslimeen (at the cost of Shia beliefs). The convergence of these trends can be seen heading towards the caliphate of mujtahideen, although with a different naming scheme.
3. The Usuli allegation that Akhb rism is a movement that started four centuries ago and was intellectually defeated is false.
4. It is established that generalization that causes a fallible man's decision to gain the status of divine law is against the gist of Shia Islam. The Usuli appeal to "reason" ('Aql) is similar to the Sunni qiyas, though all early Sh a authorities are unanimous in rejecting qiyas (analogy).

Anti-Akhb r

Akhb r s claim to follow Hadith directly, without the need for generalisation, or of finding the reason for the decision. This, according to Usulis, is a logical impossibility. Hadith takes the form of case law, that is to say the narration of decisions taken in a concrete situation. To "follow" such a decision one must know which features of the situation are or are not relevant to the decision, as exactly the same set of facts will never occur twice. Therefore some degree of generalisation is unavoidable, even on the most literal view: the choice is simply between mechanical generalisation and intelligent generalisation.

Regarding Islamic laws, there are various issues faced by Muslims in their daily lives. e.g. doubts in nam z and their corrections, conditions which invalidate a fast and the relevant compensations, rulings vis vis correctness or incorrectness of various social and business practices e.g. Investing in Mutual Funds, Use of alcohol based perfumes and medicines, etc. Yet, Akhbaris say that the Imams mentioned general-rules that we may use to know the ruling of modern issues.

Prominent Akhb r scholars

• Shaikh al-Hur al-Aamili
• Shaikh Hashim Al Bahrani
• Yusuf Al Bahrani
• Abdullah al Samahiji
• Salih Al-Karzakani
• Shaykh Muhammad Amin Zayn al-Din^[16]
• Sayyid Aqeel Fadhil Jamal al-Den^[17]
• Syed Riyaz ud din Hyder Jaffery (self claimed neo-akhbari)^[7]

References

• Rival Empires of Trade and Imami Shiism in Eastern Arabia, 1300-1800, Juan Cole, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 19, No. 2, (May 1987), pp. 177 203
• Andrew J. Newman, The Nature of the Akhb r /U l Dispute in Late afawid Iran. Part 1: 'Abdall h al-Sam hij 's "Munyat al-Mum ris n Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, Vol. 55, No. 1 (1992), pp. 22 51

fr:Akhbarisme tr:Ahb r ( ii) ur: ( )