His Supposed Political Role in the Mongol Invasion of Baghdad

8/13/2019 His Supposed Political Role in the Mongol Invasion of Baghdad

1/179

Naliir a l D ~ n ~ u s I andthe ongol nvasion of

aghdad


2/179

.

BSTR CT

Title: N a ~ I r al-DIn ~ s r : His Supposed Pol i t ica lRole in the Mongol Invasion of BaghdadAuthor: Abdulhadi HairiDegree: Master of ArtsDepartment: Ins t i tu te of Islamic Studies, McGillUniversity, Montreal, Canada.Academie year: 1967-68The purpose of this study i s to analyze and

discuss the extent of ~ s r s involvement in the Mongolinvasion of Baghdad in 1258 A D To elucidate th is disputed question i t was fe l t necessary to present a briefbiography of ~ s r as well as evidence of his att i tudestowards the Caliphal power of the time. The analysis ofth is particular problem i s made against the backgroundof a considerable number of other authors studies,most of which have been peripheral to the centralproblem of th is work.

The result of research done for this study i sthat ~ s i s collaboration with the Mongols did not, tobe more accurate, could not have any remarkable effecton the fa l l of Baghdad and that contrary to received


3/179

opinion, ~ s i s exonerated from any crime against Islamand the Muslims. t i s fe l t that this work for thet i r s t time, throws l ight on a disputed historiesproblem whieh has remained obscure sinee 1258.


4/179

NA9IR AL DIN ~ HIS SUPPOSED POLITICAL ROLE IN THE MONGOL

INVASION 0] B GHD D

byAbdu1hadi Hairi

A thesis submitted to the Facu1tyof Graduate Studies and Researchin p rt i l fu1fi1ment of therequirements for the degree

of Master of Arts

Inst i tute of Is1amic StudiesMcGi11 University

MontrealCanada

January 1968

Abdulhadi Hairi 1968 1


5/179

PREF CE

l shou1d 1ike to express my sincere gratitudeto aI l those in the Ins t i tu te of Is1amic Studies whohave given me guidance and encouragement in working onth is thesis . Above al l l owe thanks to Dr. Charles

dams who provided the opportunity for me to study inthe Is1amic Ins t i tu te of McGil University, Montreal. lgreat1y appreciate the congenial academic milieu whichhas been directed by him and in which l have enjoyedthe privilege of working since Fall 1964. l shouldl ike to acknowledge my thanks to Dr. Richard Verdery,Dr. Michel Mazzaoui, Dr. Donald Li t t l e Dr. MahdiMUQaqqiq and Dr. Hermann Lando1t whose advice concerningdifferent stages of th is thesis has been very useful .

The format of th is the sis follows the systemof Ray McKeen Wiles Scholarly R e p o r t i n ~ n ~Humanities. (Ottawa, 1951).

For Arabie and Persian t rans1iterat ion l haveused the Bulletin 59 of the Cataloguing Service of theLibrary of Congress (WaShington, D.C., 1963) whichhas been approved by the American Library Association


6/179

and the Library of Congress, but the authors l havequoted in this work have given various types of t rans-l i tera t ion which, of course, have not been changed fromthe original . Generally known t i t l e s and names of theplaces such as Iran ' 'Baghdad', ' Islam' and 'Vizier 'are excepted from the Library of Congress' conventionof t ransl i tera t ion and they have been l e f t plain; indoing th is l have mainly followed li PronouncingGazetteer , attached to the second volume, th i rdedit ion of Webster's New ~ e r n t i o n l Dictionary ofthe English Language, (Springfield, Mass., 1961).

Technical words are underlined only for f i r s tmention. s i t i s apparent from the text aI l quotationsare indented from the margin, but paraphrased passagesare i n ~ o r p o r t e d in the text in the usual manner.

NcGill UniversityJanuary, 1968

i i i

Abdulhadi Hairi


7/179

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACEINTRODUCTION

A New Crit ical Angle on ~ s iCHAPTER ONE SHORT BIOGRAPHY OF ~ S (1200-73 A.D.)

I ~ s I s Life:A Introductory RemarksB His Early CareerC Alamt and QuhistanD The Fall of the FortressesE. The Destruction of Baghdad

I I ~ s i s WorksI I I ~ s I s Religious ViewsIV. ~ s I s Death

CHAPTER Tv O

~ S s ATTITUDE TO THZ CALIPHAL PR1. ~ s I , an Advocate of the Sect of the

TwelversI I The Caliphal Struggles for ~ o w r

iv

1

14

1418253238434755

56

5667


8/179

I I I . ~ s I s Effect on the PeriodIV. A Note on a Few Disputed Points

CHAPTER THREEt 'us s POLITICJiL COLLABORATION \ lITH THE MON OLKING,HULAG, IN THE FALL OF BAGHDAD

1 .I I .I I I .

IV.V.VI.VII.

t'sI: the Focal Point of Divergent ViewsLogic Against SubjectivityHistory Opposes the View that t'sI was aTraitort 'sI in the Contemporary SourcesThe Earl iest Account of t 'si 'sInvolvementAn Analysis of the AccountThe Later Accounts of the BaghdadInvasion

VIII. Vihy did ~ s I not Object to Hulag' sActions?

IX. ~ s I and the r lurder of the CaliphX. Conclusion

NOTESIntroductionChapter One

v

7275

8383858793

9698

105

112117119

123126


9/179

Chapter TwoChapter Three

APPENDIXBIBLIOGRAPHY

vi

351414658


10/179

INTRODUCTION

New Crit ical Angle on s i

Khwajah Nair al-Din ~ s 1200-73 A.D.),history t e l l s us, was the most distinguished Muslimscholar of his time and one of the t ruly remarkablefigures which Islamic civi l iza t ion has produced. How-ever, despi te his great significance in the history ofIslamic thought, ~ s has not yet received much atten-t ion froID scholars in general, specially from westernstudents of Islam.

~ s i s known as an outstanding figure invarious f ie lds, and as a considerable authority onphilosophy, theology, ethics, logic, astronomy andastrology. Those books which have survived indicateclearly his mastery of many subjects , and have beenstudied by sorne sCholars, but in our opinion ~ s andhis works merit more attention and more accurate study.

s far as Islamic theology i s concerned ~ sis a disputed figure who has been thought to have beena Twelver Shi ' i or an Isma' i l i Shi ' , because the books


11/179

2

which are ascribed to him cause students of his thoughtto form differing ideas about him. From the historicalpoint of view ~ s I is a controversial authority who, ata crucial time, was helping to shape history. His stayin Iran under the Isma'I lI regime,l his associationwith the Mongol conqueror, Hulag, during the Baghdadinvasion,2 the administrative position he held duringthe Mongol rule and the scient i f ic act iv i t ies hepursued in the ci ty of Maraghah3 have raised manydebatable points about fusI.

Since a l l the above factors took the attentionof two opposing groups of authors, the sunr.Is and theShI Is , various views and disputes came into existence

~ n consequently the students of the l i fe and thoughtof ~ s I have been l e f t either in the dark or with theimpression that ~ s was a double-dyed t ra i to r . 4 Evena moderate authDr5 w o has been re la t ively just about

~ u s I could not help remarking that:fusl , a t the side of the Mongol prince, Hulagu,

was to cross the greatest psychological watershedin Islamic civi l iza t ion, playing a leading part inthe capture of Baghdad

Our purpose in the present work i s to studyth is particular problem, namely, the extent of ~ u s l s


12/179

3

role in the fa l l of Baghdad, i f indeed he played anysuch role. This question, which has made ~ u s I a controversial figure of history, has not yet been discussedactively. Contemporary and near-contemporary sourceshave made reference to the fact that ~ u s i was closelyassociated with HulagU Khan the Mongol conqueror ofthe Isma l i stro:n.gholds of Iran Alamut and Quhistan)and of the Caliphal capital, Baghdad. Although thesesources are not very specifie about the exact rolewhich ~ u s i played in these events in Muslim history,s t i l l one i s le f t with the impression that bothHulag and ~ u s i planned and executed the campaignsagainst the Isma III forts and Baghdad, and that ~ u s I spart in ~ o n o l affairs at this period was crucial forthe final success of these campaigns.

To study the case more clearly, we have toexamine every possible val d source concerning thisparticular problem from ~ u s i s time onwards. The sourceswe have been using in the present project can beclassif ied as follows:

(a) primary or contemporary sources;(b) nearlycontemporary sources;(c) la ter sources;(d) modern sources.


13/179

a. Primary SourcesThere are only a few works which can be

considered as primary materials on the subject:1. Tabaqat-i NaeirI written by Jzjani in 658/

1259 A.D., that is to say, one year af ter the Baghdadinvasion. JuzjanI S ~ 9 a k S highly of M u s t a ~ i m ondifferent occasions,6 but he never connects the Baghdadquestion with ~ u s I . e does not even mention ~ u s I sname in his history. This book has been t ranslatedinto English by M H G Raverty.?

2. Mukhtaar al-Duwal, by Bar-Hebraeus (1226-82 A.D.). This general history was compiled in Arabiearound the end of the author s l i f e (1282 A.D.). Thisbook had been written by the author in the Syriaclanguage, but he was advised to translate i t intoArabie. Besides t ranslat ing i t into Arabie, B a r H e b r a ~made a revision of i t and compiled his work in the formwhich i s now available. 8 This early source comprisesconcise notes on ~ u s I through which one cannot get anyimpression that TusI might have played any role in thequestion. 9

3. Al-ijawadith al-Jami ah of Ibn al-FuwatI canbe regarded as an important source on the question.This I raq i author who had a very close intel lectual


14/179

e

ssociation with ~ s i wrote his book in 657 A.H., oneyear af ter the capture of Baghdad. In talking of thefa l l of Baghdad or the murder of theCaliph, Ibn a l

u w a ~ I does not refer to TusI as assistant of the- - 10Mongol c o n q u e ~ o r , Hulagu.

5

4. TusI himself speaks of the Baghdad invasion. in his concise history, KayfIyat-i Vaqi'ah-' i Baghdad

and never admits any act ivi ty on his part concerning thecapture of Baghdad. In the th ird chapter we will discussthe question w h e ~ r ~ u s I s words can be re l iable ornot. In short , we cannot ever learn ny facts concerning Tusi 's effect on the fa l l of Baghdad in nyavailable contemporary sources.

b. Nearly Contemporary Sourcesmong the nea.r-contemporary sources which deal

with our subject there are several noteworthy workswhich are given in the fol1owing l i s t :

1 . AI-FakhrI of Ibn ~ a q ~ a q a written in 701/1301 A.D. The author mentions Tusi just once at the endof his book concerning Ibn al - AlqamI' s connecJeion with

- - 12Hulagu.


15/179

6

2. Tarikh-i GuzIdah which ijamd Allah MustavfIwrote in 730/1329 A.D. also lacks any information about

~ s I s involvement in the fa l l of -Baghdad. 133. Tarikh AbI al-Fida' whose author died in

732/1331 A.D. gives a short description of ~ u s i s l i fe ,14the fa l l of Baghdad and the murder of the Caliph15 andf inal ly says that i t i s not known how M u s t a ~ i m was

16 - . - - executed. bu a l F ~ d a never involves ~ u s ~ in th ispart icular question.

4. The three above-mentioned near-contemporarysources give, as we noticed, no hint at ~ u s i s part inthe capture of Baghdad but some obscure accounts of thematter can be found in two histor ies . The f i r s t of thesetwo, Jami al-Tavarlkh, written in 710/1310 A.D. byHashid al-Din can be considered the ear l iest accountwhich has ever been given of the question of Tusi 's rolein the Baghdad invasion. The author has not, as far aswe can see, referred the Baghdad disaster to ~ u s I at al l .In our third chapter vi will act ively discuss hisaccount and will remark that in spi te of general beliefnot only is TusI's involvement far from obvious, butthat there are considerable indications which leave uswith the idea of Tsi 's being innocent in the affaire


16/179

7

5. Another near-contemporary source which doescomprise an obscure account of ~ s i concerning theBaghdad invasion i s Tarikh-i Vaeeaf al-Hafirah whichwas compiled in 728/1327 A.D. V a ~ ~ a f s report onHulag s consultation with ~ s i on the capture ofBaghdad is more or less simi1ar to that of Rashid l -Din with one additional point. He adds that f te r

~ s i said that Hulag would win the war, Hulag with astout hear,t and a calm sp i r i t moved to Baghdad. 17 Thispoint, as f r as Vie are concerned, is based on theauthor s imagination. Evidence i s overwhelming on thefact that the motives of Hulag for the conquest ofBaghdad were several other things with which ~ s i hadnothing to do. 18

6. mong near-contemporary materials, IbnTaymiyah s \olorks, in which TsI has been bi t t e r lycondemned, are vle11-known. This radical l luslim theolo-gian (661-728/1262-1327 A.D.) has cal led him Mushrik(polytheist) and heret ic . 19 Ibn Qayyim (691-751/1291-1350 A.D.), who was a disciple of Ibn TaymIyah follows

- 20his master in the questions which concern ~ U S 1 andIbn al- Imad a l - ~ a n b a l r , the author of Shadharat a1-Dhahab (died 1089/1678 A.D.) has quoted him (IbnQayyim).21 s a matter of fact l l the Islamic sects


17/179

8

and scholars have been refuted by the above-mentionedauthors, and ~ u s is one of them. e will occasional1ydiscuss some of their words in the second chapter.

c. Later Sources1 Fawat al-Wafayat of Ibn Shakir (died 764/

1362 A.D.) i s one of the standard biographical dict ionaries of the fourteenth century. In th is book theauthor is quite neutral in his at t i tude, and neverspeaks of ~ U S S possible effect on the invasion.22

2. Another author of the la ter period i s9afadI (797/1394- who wrote his famous book,AI-WarI bi al-Wafayat in thir ty valumes in alphabeticalforme Like Ibn Shakir, 9afadI seems also to have beena neutral writer: e t reats ~ u s in almost the sameway as Ibn Shakir, and nothing concerning ~ U S Sinvolvement in the Baghdad disaster can be obtainedfrom i t . 23

3. abagat al -Shaf i iyah al-Kubra by SubkI(729-771/1328-1369 A.D.) t rea ts usI more or less likeIbn Taymiyah. 24 This author seems to have beeninfluenced by Ibn Taymlyah s thought on this matter.


18/179

9

4. MIrkhwand the author of an important generalhistory which was written in the ninth-f i f teenth centur,y(died 903/1498 A.D.) ta1ks about ~ s I , as i great1yinf1uenced by V a ~ ~ a f t s account. This book, R a v ~ a t -Safa has added one phrase to V a ~ ~ a f t s words, and saysthat Hu1ag considered ~ s I as an arbi t rator in thecase. 25 s we will discuss in our thi rd chapter thisphrase is a1so based on the imagination of the author.

5. KhwandamIr (880-942/1475-1535 A.D.) in ijabIba1-Siyar refers the invasion to the inst igat ion ofIbn al- AlqamI on the one hand, and to the approval of

~ s on the other. 266. Majalis a1-Mu minIn of ShshtarI (murdered

1019/1610 A.D.) admires ~ s I very high1y and be1ievesthat since ~ s I knew M u s t a ~ i m t s bigotry he caused theMongols to sack Baghdad. 27

7. In the R a w ~ a t al-Jannat, (writ ten 1286/1869A.D.) KhwansarI has a re1ative1y long essay on ~ s Idiscussing ~ s I s posit ion with regard to the Baghdadproblem, but he has come to a superficial conclusion.He great1y admired ~ s I because he considered him asthe murderer of the Caliph and his people whom he calledinfide1s. 28


19/179

10

d. Modern SourcesIn modern times (the twentieth century) some

authors have studied th is part icular problem, but sincethese studies are not based on profound and re l iableinvestigation, ~ u s r has been judged either as a crimi-nal or a pious man, therefore this controve.rsial aspectof ~ u s r s t i l l remains unexplained. Browne in A LiteraryHistory of Persia, Arberry in Classical Persian Literature, Levy in Persian Literature are of those whosecondemnations of ~ s r seem to have been quite far fromjus t and Qummr s biography of ~ s r 9 sounds l ike akind of exaggeration. In judging ~ s r those writerswho condemned him might have been influenced by thethought of authors l ike Ibn Taymiyah whose accounts of

~ s r seem to have been based on the radical religiousviews, whereas QummI s praise o ~ s r must have beenderived from the religious bel iefs which he sharedwith ~ u s r .

mong the modern vi ters \1ickens, 30 HOdgson,31Shabrbr32 and Azzawr33 appear to be moderate about~ s r but they did not t ry to go deeply into theproblem in order to throw l ight on this his toricalissue.


20/179

11

During recent years two independent works havebeen published in the Persian language by TehranUniversity on the occasion of ~ s I s seventh century.One of them was writ ten by Mudarris RaHavI and anotherone by Mudarris ZanjanI. Although these two books helpthe in terested Persian reader to obtain more detailedinformation about ~ s I t s l i fe his works, his professors,his disciples and his religious views, they have notactively and cr i t ica l ly discussed the problem of ~ s I t srole in the fa l l of Baghdad.

RaHavI, for example, quotes and paraphrasesquite a few authors concerning th is matter but he isnot in the least cr i t ica l . e jumps to a conclusionsaying that ~ s I could not real ly be the main cause ofthe fa l l of the ~ b b s i d dynasty, but that he was notJithout effect ei her . RaHavI never describes how and

through which reasoning he reached this conclusion. 34The .other author, ZanjanI, also has not dealt

with the problem in detai l . e puts the blame on theCaliph and his men of the court, and t r ies his best toexonerate ~ s I 3 5 In brief , neither of the works,especial ly ZanjanI s, uses the techniques of modernscholarship and they do not give precise and clearreferences.


21/179

12

~ u s ' s own works cannot be suff ic ient materialthrough which one m y understand the problems , though,to a degree, they are helpful, and we will occasionallymake reference to them. Consequently f ter sevencenturies an important aspect of an extremely dis t ing-uished figure, that i s to say, ~ u s ' s role in the f l lof Baghdad has s t i l l remained obscure, and as f r aswe can see, no independent English work has yet beenpublished on ~ u s and no author, ei ther in Persian orin Arabie or in English, has yet devoted a detailedstudy to th is par t icular problem ( ~ u s ' s role in theBaghdad question). Therefore, the main goal in thepresent work i s to analyse the problem of ~ u s ' spart in the f l l of Baghdad.

Prior to th is analysis, we will devote thef i r s t chapter to the biography of ~ u s . This sectionhelps to get an idea about his background. The secondchapter presents ~ u s ' s at t i tude towards the Caliphalpower, and, of course, ~ u s ' s conception of rulership.This part of the work helps readers to notice how f r~ u s ' s collaboration with the Mongol conqueror ofBaghdad, as far as ~ u s himself considered, was lawful.l Je will discuss the main problem in the third chapterremarking that in spite of what a great number of


22/179

3

authors have said ~ s does not seem to have had anyremarkable role in the capture of Baghdad and he wasnot a betrayer. In addition in the l ight of hisin te l lect and his f lexibi l i ty he played a great rolein the continuance of Islamic philosophy law andcivi l iza t ion e are inclined to the opinion that ~ shas been misjudged and that he should be reexamined.


23/179

CH PTERr ONE

A SHORT BIOGR PHY O ~ s 1200-73 A.D.)I us i s Life

A. Introductory RemarksI t is a truism to say that i t i s almost

impossible to obtain an accurate understanding of aperson, from a part icular point of view, withouthaving a closer look at his l i fe and background. I f ,for instance, one i s interested in Plato s pol i t ica lideas , or in Aristot le s conception of a ruling body,one has to make a survey of the historical situationin Greece. This survey will help to find out why Platopreferred an oligarchie form of government to thedemoeratie ideas of Greeee before his time. l

Similarly, in studying the eonstitutionaltheories of Aristotle, i t i s neeessary to bear in mindthe main faets of his l i fe . s Taylor says:

14


24/179

15

l he was a contemporary of Demosthenes his man-hood witnessed the struggle which ended in theestablishment of the Macedonian monarchy as thedominant power in Hellas and his l a te r years thecampaigns in which his pupil Alexander the Greatoverthrew the Persian Empire and carried Greekcivi l isa t ion to the banks of the Jumna I2

All these events which took place during Aris to t le sl i fe , and which certainly had a great effect on hisconst i tut ional theories must be considered.

Therefore in order to understand more ful ly~ u s I s effect on the Baghdad invasion of 1258 and toanalyse his pol i t ica l role more accurately and to findout the idea behind his poli t ical act ivi t ies, i t is ofgreat importance to sketch brief ly the various periodsof his l i fe and draw attention to his important pol i t i cal writ ings. Such a sketch will help to explain certainl imitat ions of outlook which might otherwise appearstrange in so great a man I t will throw a great dealof l ight on his att i tude towards the Baghdad Caliphatewhich has always been considered a crucial problem in~ u s i s l i f e .

There is more reason to do that since no fu l l -scale biography of ~ u s i i s at present available andno scholar or student of Persian history has so far


25/179

undertaken the project to provide us with a cr i t i ca land detai led l i fe of this highly controversialpoli t ical figure of the mid-thirteenth century Muslimworld.

16

Some modern scholars have given short biographical sketches of ~ s I or mentioned him inpassing in their writings. The information given bythese authori t ies is to ta l ly inadequate. 3 Others havedealt primarily with his religious views, but have notattempted to outline his pol i t ica l career or the mainevents of his l i f e which are often the only clues tohis poli t ical behaviour. 4

Some attempt has been made quite recently toproduce monographs on the l i fe and works of ~ s I . Thishasbeen undertaken chiefly by Persian scholars on theoccasion of his seven hundredth anniversary. Mentionshould be made here of the work by Mudarris R a ~ a v Ient i led A9 val va Ajar-i sI5 and that by MudarrisZanjanI enti t led Sarguzasht va Aqa id-i s ~These works were a very good beginning, but uponcloser examination they 1tJill be found to be ratherinadequate. n attempt has been made in these worksta l i s t and describe ~ S I I S many compositions and


26/179

t reat ises However, in many cases the analysis isinsufficient and more work in this part icular f ieldis required. 7

A more recent attempt to outline cr i t ica l lythe l i fe and major works of 1s has been made by theCanadian scholar and Persianist G M Wickens. As anintroduction to his translation of 1sI 's Akhlag-iNajirI ,8 Wickens has supplied the reader w i ~ a s h o r t

17

but cr i t ical sketch of 1us ' s l i fe and works. Thissketch can serve as a point of departure for any futurescholar who ma:y \ lant to undertake a ful ler project.This, however, will not be an easy undertaking.

To begin with, 1si did not leave sufficientautobiography for future readers. 9 There are someautobiographical remarks which may, with diff icul ty ,be collected from his several writings. 10 These arefew, and they create more problems of chronology thanthey solve. Some of his correspondence exists , but th istoo is problematical. l l

Contemporary accounts of 1s ' s l i fe are almostnon-existent. Mention should be made here of, forexample, Ibn a l - F u w a ~ ' s Al-ijawadith al-Jami'ah, whichd t f t t f h 12es no g ~ v any ~ n orma ~ v accoun s 0 ~ m


27/179

-e 18Later Persian historians of the second and

th i rd generations af ter ~ s I make references to him,but these, though useful in many ways, are tooincomplete to give us a ful l and comprehensive pictureof his l i f e These include such historians as RashIdal-DIn, V a ~ ~ a r and others.13 Fifteenth centuryhistorians l ike MIrkhwand and KhwandamIr are basedgenerally on their more i l lus t r ious predecessors. Moreinformative biographies of ~ s I are to be found inl a te r twelver ShI I biographical works such as QummIShshtarI, and KhwansarI.14

I t is not the object of th is work to go intoaI l the detai ls of the l i fe of ~ s I . Only those aspectsof his l i fe that will help us in explaining a part ofhis poli t ical act iv i t ies will be dealt with in sornedeta i l

B. His Early CareerMUQammad Ibn M u ~ a m m a d Ibn ~ a s a n ~ s I often

known as Khwajah N a ~ I r 1 5 was born, according tosources,16 in 597/1200 A.D. He was from ~ s ineastern Iran, the homeland now ruined) of a largenumber of Islamic figures such as GhazzalI,


28/179

9

Khwajah N i ~ a m al-Mulk ~ u s I and others. His father,M u ~ a m m a d Ibn a l ~ a s a n was a twelver (rthna'aSharI)ShI'Iand a m u ~ a d d i t h of ~ u s . After his elementary studies,e.g. obtaining a reading knowledge of the Qur'an andlearning l i terature and Arabie grammar, he started tostudy Islamic jurisprudence, fiqh, and ~ a d I t h t radit ion,with his father. t has been said that he studied logicand theology with his uncle. l7 In the meantime: hestudied mathematics. To complete his education, he l e f thome for Nishapur now called Nayshabur), at the timea center of learning for a great number of students andscholars from al l over the Islamic lands. NIshapur wasalso the capital of Ir.an under the ~ a h i r i y a n and someother Persian dynasties. 18 Although the ci ty hadsuffered tremendous bloodshed and massacre from theSaljqI soldiers and had los t a good number of schools,mosques, and l ibrar ies as well as many sCholars, i ts t i l l kept i t s importance unti l the conquest of theMongols. Therefore, ~ s I had a good opportunity tojoin the different study circles there for a certainperiod of time. 19

The author of Majalis al-mu'minIn remarks that~ s I learned rat ional knowledge, ma'arif- i 'agl yah,under Farid al-DIn Damad who was a pupil of


29/179

Sayyid ~ a d r al-Din Sarakhsi. Sarakhsi was one .of thestudents of A f ~ a l al-Din Ghaylani whose professor wasbu al- Abbas Lukri. He [Lukri] in turn was a student

of Bahmanyar who was Avicenna s famous pupil . 20

20

Not much is knownabout ~ u s i s career beforethe Isma i l i forts were captured by Hulagu, thereforewe cannot give very accurate information about his l i feas a student in Nishapur. e do not know precisely whenand how and why he l e f t the ci ty for the Isma i l i forts .The story of ~ u s i s departure from Nishapur is recordedby various authors who differ in their opinions. QaflINur Allah Shushtari says that , in the beginning, ~ u s iwas in the mood to spread ~ publicise Shi ism andthat he noticed that Ibn a l- Alqami (died 656/1258 A.D.),the learned shI i chief minister of the Caliph ofBaghdad (from 1245-1258) could be the best patron ofth is idea, therefore he intended to go to Baghdad. Hewrote a le t te r to Ibn al- Alqami in which he praised theCaliph in order to bring the influence of Shi ahthought to bear on him and, with the help of Ibn a lAlqami, to convert the Caliph to the Shi ah sect .Ibn a l - Alqami, hOvJever did not respond to him.Finally he was taken to Quhistan by N a ~ i r al-Din(died 655/1257), the Quhistan Isma i l i commander. 2l


30/179

21

The point made by Qa I Nur Allah does not seemto be correct , because the Caliph, a l - M u s t a ~ i m (609-56/

221212-58 A.D. , came to power in 640/1242 A.D., andIbn al- AlqamI became his chief minister in 642/1244 A.D. 23 while ~ u s had already moved to Quhistan,and he had written his Akhlaq-i NairI about 633/

24 ,1235 A.D., namely seven years before Musta ~ i m tookover the Caliphate, and ten years before Ibn l-AlqamI was appointed to his posit ion in the court ofthe Caliph.

V a ~ ~ a f , in his TarIkh, s tates that ~ u s I wroteto Ibn al- AlqamI a le t te r together with an excellentpraising elegy, qajIdah, when he was already inQuhistan. Ibn al- AlqamI, who for some unknown reasondid not want ~ u s I to go to Baghdad, returned the l e t te rto N a ~ i r al-Din, the Isma i l I leader of Quhistari andwarned him of the unhappy resul ts which ~ U S I I S re la t ions with the Caliph might lead to . Consequently, ~ u s iwas imprisoned for a long t ime. 25

There are several. accounts about ~ u s I sleaving Nishapur for Quhistan, and about his t r ip fromQuhistan to Alamut, and about his relat ions with Ibnal- Alqami. However, since the evidence about the above-


31/179

mentioned matters: i s not very clear, no accurateaccount of th is part of his l i fe can be given. The.only remarkable point which i s worth noting here isthat when ~ s I was l iving in NIshapr, the Mongolsoldiers were occupying the ci t ies of Khurasan oneaf ter another, and they were about to reach NIshapr.All the people were ter r i f ied . In addition, ~ s I aswell as other ShI Is were not secure in such an

22

environment where they were surrounded by a bigmajority of the SunnIs. ~ s I might have fe l t that theIsma I l I forts in Quhistan were the best refuge. I t i sa possibi l i ty that he took shelter in the forts to savehis l i fe . This inclination of ~ s I might have beenstrengthened by the in terest that the Isma I l I leaderof Quhistan had to cal l him t the for ts .

In fact, he escaped from a bad si tuat ion toone that was only slightly better; that i s he wentfrom the sunnIs and the b l o o d ~ t h i r s t y Mongol soldiersto the Isma I l Is with w om he had more in common buthe s t i l l did not feel safe with them ei ther .

I t i s known that ~ s I changed his introductionsto the Akhlag-i NairI26 and the Risalah Mu InIyah27which were favourable to the Isma I l is . Moreover, hecomplained in various places, such as his commentary on


32/179

Ibn Sinais Isharat28 and the Taavvurat29 and in thesecond introduction to the Akhlaq-i Nairi about thei l l - treatment he suffered under the power of the dey.All these references indicate that ~ u s i was obliged tostay with the Isma i l is . Ivanow remarks:

The nature of his re la t ions with the Ismail is s t i l lremains hopelessly obscure. References to i t are soconfusing and contradictory that not much sense canbe made out of them. What is certain and indisputable i s the fact tha t his connection was long,on a more or less permanent basis. Towards themiddle of the twelfth c , he n ~ was connectedwith the Isma i I I head functionary in the Eastprovinces where the Ismaili population wasconsiderable. ,,30

Most of the works ascribed to him werewritten while under the Isma i l is . e found the fortsa congenial milieu where he could put his thoughts intowriting, because his in te l lectual master, N a ~ i r al-Din,was a good patron for him. One of his famous works i sthe Akhlag-i N a ~ i r i which i s on ethics and practicalwisdom, Qikmat-i amalI, and was writ ten in the nameof his master, N a ~ i r al-Din. This book covers ~ u s I sideas about ruler and ruled, parents and children,master and slave, justice, love, and many other aspectsof human l i fe , and most of the ideas are based on the


33/179

philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, as well as FarabIand other Islamic thinkers who were influenced bythose great Greek philosophers.

His conception of the rule in the Islamiccommunity is clear ly h i i t e ~ e belj.eves that the

24

virtuous s tate has to be ruled by a person who i sinfal l ible and i s appointed by God that is the Imam. 31...........Over a hundred and f i f ty books, t rea t ises and l e t t e rson various subjects have been ascribed to him, some ofwhich will be discussed.

From Akhlaq-i Nairi one may learn theapproximate date of ~ s i s migration from Nishapr toQUhistan, because in the supplementary section heattached to his book he points out that the chapterwas appended sometime in 663/1262 A.D., th i r ty yearsaf ter the composition of the book, that i s in the year633/1235 A.D. 32 This item from ~ u s i s book indicatesthat he had been associating with the Isma i l i leaderbefore s tart ing to write his book. However assumingthat he had gone to Quhistan on the invi tat ion ofN a ~ i r al-Din, the date of his moving cannot be ear l ie rthan 624/1226 A.D., because this is the date whenN a ~ i r al-Din became the commander of the Isma i l is(624/1226 A.D.). Thus ~ u s i l ived with the Isma i l is


34/179

for over twenty years, that is to say unt l theconquest of the Isma i l i s forts by the Mongols in654/1256 A.D.

We know that within th is period of time ~ s istayed with the Isma i l Is , but in both Quhistan andAlamt. These two regions were under the power of theIsma I l i s for about two centuries (from the conquest

25

of ~ l m t in 483/1090 A.D. to the capture of the for tsby Hulag in 654/1256 A.D.).

C. Alamt and Quhistano give a detailed description of the origins

of the Isma IIIs in general and Persian Isma i l Is inpar t icular requires a separate work. The interestedreaders may go to various re la ted sources. 3? Brieflywe may say that the Isma I l is created an active move-ment to replace the Caliphal dynasty with the houseof Ali . Hodgson states:

The Isma i l iyya challenged the offic ia l Islam,and the Sunni synthesis developing within i t , inthe forro of widespread conspiracy apparentlyinvolving support from peasant villages and bedouint r ibes as weIl as \ lell-placed off ic ia ls . Thesummons to allegiance to the Imams descended from


35/179

Ja ' far ' s son Isma' l was cal led the Isma' lda'wa. Representing this da'wa, t ravell ing da' s ,summoners, aroused and directed from a concealedcentral headquarters a general attack against theBaghdad Caliphate and against other rulers w otheoret ical ly recognized i t s a u t h o r i t y ~ 4

The two areas where the Isma' l da'wah wasvery strong, and where adherents were known to havebeen in large numbers, were Quhistan in the east andAlamt in north-west Iran.

26

The ruins of the fortress of Alamt are situatedon the summit of a lof ty wld almost inaccessible rockin the heart of the Alburz mountains,two days' marchnorth-north east of Qazv n. 35 L.Lockhart says:

"In 246/860, the 'Alid al-J;[asan al-Da' i l a ' l -J ; [ ~ ~ rebuil t the cast le . ijasan-i 9abba, the founderof the Assassins,seized Alamt in 483/1090 andmade i t the head-quarters of the Order.,,36

The s t ra tegie posit ion of th is place has beenpointed out by Hodgson as follows:

The taking of .Alamut near Qazv n in 1090 wouldseem to have released a flood of Isma' l energies,in the direction of which J;[asan-i 9abba took atleast a prominent part from that key spot. Alamutwas appropriate to such a role . Alamut i t s e l f wasin an inaccessible, rough terrain . The geographer


36/179

27

QazvinI in the Athar (al-Bilad) says that Rudbar isa l rocks and t rees , and adds (as i f part of thesame repell ing picture) that the inhabitan"ts areDaylamites But Alamut was also on the shortestroute between the important c i ty of Qazvin and theCaspian Sea. Alamut had been used by a ZaydI imamin the past as a rel iable stronghold; and Yaqtemphasizes i t s general importance as key toDaylaman.,,37

Alamut was the center of a ShI'ah sta te between483/1090 A.D. and 654/1256 A.D. The s tate grew out ofan attempt by Isma'I lIs of Iran to break the power ofthe SunnI Saljuqs on behalf of the Fatimid rulers ofEgypt. Among the leaders, apart from SabbaQ, the mostimportant were the learned Abd al-Malik Ibn A ~ ~ a s h ,da ' (propagandist) of Isfahan and his son ~ a d ibn

~ A ~ ~ a s h , who seized Shahdiz near Isfahan in 494/1100 A.D.

Wi th the concentration of daljJq pO\ Jer in thehand of M u ~ a m m a d Tapar, the t ide turned against theIsma'I lIs; Shahdiz fe l l in 500/ 1107 A.D. and Alamutwas in grave danger when M u ~ a m m a d s death in 511/1118A.D. allowed the I s m a ~ i l i s a time of recuperation. Bythis time the leadership was clearly in the hands ofijasan-i 9 a b b a ~ a t Alamut. He controlled an essential lyindependent s tate consisting of the strongholds in the


37/179

Rdbar di s t r i c t around Alamt of the for tress ofGirdkh near Damghan and numerous towns in Quhistansouth of Khurasan. 38

28

This Quhistan is cal led the Quhistan of Khurasanin dis t inct ion I the Quhistan of Kermn southern Iran.The former one i s the mountainous and par t ia l ly arableregion which stretches south of Nishapr as fa r ass i s tan in the southeast. I t i s surrounded on a l l sidesby the great sa l t desert of the central Iranian plateauand consis ts of scat tered groups of oases. 39

Kramers explains th is di s t r i c t as follows:l one feature of i t s geographical unitY is thefac t that no part of i t belongs to one of the greatcenters of civi l izat ion that surround t [e.g.Nishapr Herat s is tan and Kerman]. Although

~ h i s t a n has always been connected with these bycaravan routes and i s therefore not absolutely cutof f ,i t s i sola ted posi t ion combined with the relat ive-

ly low productivity of the soi l , has caused i t tobe l i t t l e known and neglected and i t s inhabitantshave usually been ruled by a number of independentlords ~ h i s t a n has therefore never been a veryclean cut geographical termi 40

This region in the time of the 3aljqs 4l whichhad been the old asylum of the Zoroastrians became arefuge for the Ism a i l i heret ics who for this reason


38/179

29

\Vere often called al-malaidah a l - ~ h i y a h . They bui l there strongho1ds on the mode1 of the famous citade1 ofAlamt; there are s t i l l many ruins of their castIeswhih have not yet been examined.

Ibn a1-Athir in his chronology of the year494/1KnA.D. remarks that ijasan-i 9 a b b a ~ conquered apart of Quhistan in 484/1091 A.D., name1y about oneyear af ter the conquest of Alamt. 42 Hodgson points out:

Th history of the state [Alamt] was dominatedby a sustained hos t i l i ty between the Isma i l is andthe smTounding Sunnite and even Qi i te populat ions; a host i l i ty expressed on the one side inrepeated massacres of aI l Slspected I s m a ~ I 1 I s in atown and on the other side in assassinations ofthe i r most active enemies, such as N i ~ a m a l - M u 1 ~ , ~ 3

After ijasan-i 9 a b b a ~ s death (518/1124 A.D.)a number of ru1ers came to power and governed the Orderof Assassins. The 1ast two Isma'i1i ru1ers of Iranwere ~ l a a 1 ~ D i n uammad (609-656/1212-1258 A.D.) andhis son Khurshah who persuaded ijasan I1azandaranl: tomurQer his father in 653/1255 A D 44 Khurshah was incharge of the Isma'l:ll: forts in Alamt just for oneyear (653-654/1255-56 A.D.), and was ki11ed by Mang-Qa'an's men when on his way to the 1a t t e r s court.45


39/179

~ s I went to l ive under Isma III pol i t icalcontrol when Ala al-DIn was in power (ruled 618-656/1221-1258 A.D.).46

As we mentioned before there are several

3

accounts about ~ s I s departure from NIshapr. Butsupposing that we consider the words of V a ~ ~ a f andothers to be more or less well founded, the passagegiven by KhwandamIr in ijabIb al-s iyar would be acceptable too. He remarks that when N a ~ i r al-DIn came tokno VJ that ~ u s I had praised the Caliph he became angrywith him and put him in prison; and when he wanted togo to Ala al-DIn 11uQ ammad , the chief leader of theIsma i l is of Iran, he took ~ s i with him to Alamt andl e f t him there. rsi ivas l iving wi th the heretics unt i lthe l longols came. Then ~ s i l e f t 11aymn Diz, thecapi ta l of Alamt, and joined the Ilkhan and enjoyedthe i r favour and became one of the closest associatesat the court of the Mongol commander. 47

Thus v e see that in the l as t port ion of hisassociation with the Ism i il i s , ~ s i had a diff icul ttime, because he had fa l len from the favour of hismasters and was under suspicion of them unt i l theMongols overthrew the Ism i il i s . In the cr i t ica l condit ions in which ~ s i was l iving one may come to the


40/179

31

conclusion that those works on the Isma i l i ideas whichare ascribed to ~ s i were written i f they are hisunder the pressure of the Isma i l i power. Of those hewrote on the Isma i l is are the Taeavvura, Sayr Vasulk, and others.

One of the characteristics of the Isma i l ileaders was that they were very interested in o n t r i ~buting to human knovlledge by at tract ing knowledgeablepeople, collect ing treasure houses of books, andproducing works in different fields of kno\ lledge.Juvayni reports:

w ~ e n l was at the foot of Lammasar [a fort inAlamt], being desirous of inspecting the l ibrary,the fame of I,olhich had spread throughout the world,l suggested to the King [Hlag] that the valuableboolcs in Alamt ought not to be destroyed. Heapproved my words and gave the necessary orders;and l went to examine the l ibrary, from which lextracted whatever l found in the way of copies ofthe Koran and [other] choice books af ter the mannerof He brought forth the l iving from the dead(Koran, Xxx 18). l likewise picked out theastronomical instruments such as Kursis (a part ofthe astrolabe), armillary spheres ~ a t - a l - ~ a l a q ) ,complete and p rt i l astrolabes that were there.As for the remaining books, which related to their


41/179

32

heresy and error and were neither founded on t rad i -t ion nor supported by reason, l burnt them all . , ,48

They not only encouraged men of knowledge towork for them; the leader of Quhistan N a ~ i r al-DInhimself wrote a book on ethics; but he could notcomplete i t , so he l e f t t for ~ s I to f inish. Thisbook i s also t ranslated from Arabie in to Persian by

~ s I and i s called Akhlaq-i M u ~ t a s h a m i l i s ted in ~ s I sworks by Mudarris R a ~ a v i 4 9

D The Fal l of the FortressesMang Qa)an, the grandson of Chingiz, came to

power in 648/1250 A.D., being supported by the majorityof the princes and by the dist inguished authori t ies ofthe s ta te . 50 He gave different commissions to hisgenerals in various lands. These generals very oftenreported to the king expressing the discontent of thepeople with the I sma I l i leaders as weIl as with theCaliph of Baghdad. 5l Shams al-Din Qazvini, Q ~ ~ a l-;{uHat, the chiefjuo;ge) wearing chain mail went to theking and said that he had to wear armour because ofbeing afra id of the heret ics . He explained from wherethey governed the i r people and the i r s ta te .


42/179

33

Mang appointed his brother Hulag as thegovernor of West Iran, Syria, Egypt, Asia Minor, andArmenia, and ordered several armies, which were servingin different d is t r ic t s to come under the power ofHUlag. 52

The king advised his brother Hulag to enforcethe Chingizian Yasa, to be kind to those who acceptedhis leadership; to be tough and hard with those whores i s ted and to destroy the fortresses in Quhist:n.IVlang ordered Hulag to proceed against Iraq. I f theCaliph of Baghdad came to his service anu obeyed himhe should not annoy him, otherwise the Caliph shou1dbe dispatched with the others . 53

On the order of the great king, Hulag movedto I ran in 651/1253 h L followed by a tremendousnumber of soldiers . 54 He passed through Turkistan andTransoxania in 652/1254 A.L. and Damarqand in 653/1255 A.D. Then he sent a message to the heads of thedifferent regions of Iran announcing that he was goingto capture the for t resses of the heret ics . He askedfor the i r support , and threatened that i f they did notobey him he would t rea t them in the same vay as he\ Jould the h,:etics. The heads of Rm (Asia l iinor),Iraq, Khurasan, Arran, ,shlrvan, and Georgia accepted


43/179

e

Before Hulagu moved to I ran , KItbuqa, one ofMangu' s generals , ha.d gone to Quhistan an. gained sornepower in the land of the I sma I1 I s .5 6 t took Hulagone week to occupy the fo r t s in Qunistan. 'rhe I ongolconqueror sent MalH;: ;:;hams al-DIn Kurt 57 to Nasir a l -DIn, the Isma' I I I he d of Quhistan, and ordered him togive up his posi t ion . He, who was old and weak, went toHulagu with gi f t s , and became the governor of the c i tyof Tun. After tha t the hongol commander made an expedit ion t 11.1amut, the head.quarters of the Isma' I I I power,and ordered Khurshah to demolish the fo r t s and ta cometo him. 58 Khurshah sent dhahanshah, his younger bro ther ,fol lowed by a few men of Qist inc t ion, to liulagu andas - 0 for a delay of one year before cominf; to him.Meanwtile, he demolished the fo r t s of Hamn, Alamut,and Lanbs.hsar. Hulagu did not accc.;t .Lis request , and

~ a v e hi;n a deedline of f i Je days. :E'inally Khurshaha f t e r consul ta t ion with the dign i ta r i es of ~ h s t a t el e f t tille- for t s 8.nd went ta Hulagu' s camp vli ' rusi andsorne other ciistinguished iilen. Khurshah was rece i veu\'Iarrnly by Hulagu anQ married a i iongolian g i r l , s inceHulagu had promised. him to save Khurshah' s l i f e oncondi t ion t ha t he surrendered himsel f . Af ter a whileHulagu sent Khurshah to Mangu, but the grea t Mongol


44/179

king did not receive him and ordered him to beexecuted. 59

35

The foregoing passages are paraphrased fromRashId al-DIn s book, Jami al - tavarIkh, in order toi l lus t ra te the posi t ion of the I s m a ~ l I leaders inre la t ion to the Mongol conquerors. However, :rtasbId a l-DIn discussed ~ s I s role in the capture of Alamt byHulag. He has th is to say about th is specif ie incident:(\4fhen Khurshah received the threat of Hulag concerningobedience to tiJ.e iv;ongol regime): Khwajah l ~ a ~ l r al-DIn

~ s I who was the 00st ?erfect man and the wisest inthe world, as weIl as a group of the physicians [suchas) dal l s a l - ~ a w l a h ~ n d the i r sons who nad been keptin that t e r r i tory Dy force, not iced that 'che acts ndbehaviour of Khurshah were not Bood, t h ~ t oppressionand 3.ggression were part of his nature, and that thesigns of tyranny were apparent in him: the y hated tokeep company with ~ h heret ics ana were extremelywill ing to sio.e I:i th Hulag. They hau already beendesir ing to support Hulag, therefore they consultedwi th each other [about the pr Jblem] in private to f indthe best and easies t way to give the [ I sma l I l] landto Hulag. fe\v strane;ers and other l luslims joinedthem, and became a l l ied in the matter and made attempts


45/179

36

to encourage Khurshah to accept the Mongol authori ty .Khurshah also agreed to give in and warmly received theM t 60ongo represen a ~ v e s

This book we have been referr ing to i s one ofthe few fa i r ly early sources on the Mongol conquest ofIran, and the only role at t r ibuted to Tsi in thecapture of Alamt is what this near-contemporary sourcehas described. I f we accept that i t was only Tsiamong the consultat ive members who preferred Hulag srule to Khurshah s, and influenced the others, t s t i l lwould not seem jus t to cal l Tusi a betrayer of hisI sma i l i master, as some la ter authors and modernl s lamists pointed out. 6l I t is not jus t , because theoverwhelming power of the Mongol commander could lay\ laste the whole country, and any resistance would havebeen a further step towards a more horrible massacre oThe plan of ~ s i and his friends in convincing h u r s h ~ hto avoid illy confl ic t li th Hulag seems to have been anaction v/hich was taken for the sake of Khurshah and hispeople to save their l ives.

Certain Islamists have expressed the i r viewsabout ~ s i in th is matter. Levy, for example, SQys:

Il he appears not only to have betrayed hisI sma i l i master to Hlagu, but to have been


46/179

37

instrumental in bringing the l as t Oaliph treacherously to his death at the hands of the Mongols.,,62

Arberry, on the other hand.,. remarks:~ s I i s stated to have chosen this moment to take

revenge on his gaolers, by betraying Khrshah intoHlag s hands. The year 125 6 marked the turningpoint in his fortunes. The Mongol rewarded ~ s Ihandsomely for his obliging treachery, and advancedhim to high rank in his court ,,63

I t appears that Arberry s point o n e ~ n ~ n g thereason for ~ s I ' s being well-treated by the Mongols i snave. vi kn vl that the Mongol kings viere very interested.in two f ields of knowledge, history and astrology:history to record the i r expeditions, conquests, andprogress; astrology to find out about their future,about the proper time to make expeditions, and aboutthe fortunes of their enemies and their own. ~ u s I , asfar as they were concerned, was the r ight person at the

~ time and for the r ight posit ion namely, to actas an astrologer. The Mongol kings already knew abouthim. 64 RashId al-DIn ] atil Allah te l l s us that 1 usIfounded an observatory in l laraghah.Mangu, who amongother l longols was distinguished in wisdom and in te l l igence, decided to have an observatory established byJamal al-Drn M u ~ a m m a d BukharI, but he was not clear


47/179

38

about some astrologie a l problems. At the same time thefame of ~ u s i had already reached Mangu. Thereforebefore he commissioned Hulagu to I ran Mangu hadwanted him to send ~ u s i to him to supervise his observatory. However, since Mangu at that time was busyaway from his court Hulagu ordered ~ s i to build theobservatory in I ran . 65

.. - - 66 - M ~ r k h w a n d in RawHat al - a fa , and h w a n d a m ~ rin Tarikh-i ijablb al-s iyar ,67 repeat th i s story inmore or le ss the same words. Even Arberry himselfcould not help admitting in his l a t e r parazraph theconnection between ~ u s I s knowledge of astrology and

H u l ~ g s respect for him by saying:I t was as an astrologer that Hlag appreciated~ s I most highty for the Mongol conqueror had a

l ively regard for the messages of the s tars . I68

E. The Destruction of BaghdadIran \ las conquered and the heads oi the

various Iranian regions obeyed H ~ l a g . The fo r ts ofthe Isma' i l i s in Quhistan and Alamt came into thehands of the l iongol conqueror but his commissionto be more precise his ambition had not come to anend. He was going to obtain more lands more treasu:ce


48/179

39

and consequently more power. Now i t was time to bringthe Islamic headquarters of Baghdad under his command.

After occupying the r ich areas, he became we11-equipped and fe1t himse1f strong enough to overthrowthe f ive hundred year old Abbasid dynasty. He setout in March 1257 A.D. for Hamadan, the famouscapi ta l of the ancient Medes. H.H. Howorth remarks:

IIAt Hamadan, Khulagu was met by Baichu, who inanswer to his reproaches that he had done so l i t t1ewith his army, replied on his knees that he hadconquered a l l the country from Rai to the bordersof Rum and Sham i . e . , Asia t1inor and Syria) . As toBaghdad, he en1arged upon the power of the Khalifand of the di f f icul ty of approaching his dominions.Nevertheless, he said, l i t i s for the prince

[Hu1agu] to command, and his slave will punctuallyobey his orders'.11 69T Ieanwhile things were going badly at Baghdad.

The Oaliph j l u s t ~ aliim was spending his l i fe indebauchery which is an error of kings, but is muchless excusable in the case of the Ualiph who i ssupposed to be obeyed by a l l the fa i thful . 7 In theautumn of 654/1256 A.D. a t e r r ib le dovmfall of rainhad flooded the tovm and submerged many of the houses,while one-half of I raq remained unt i l led. There was adispute and hos t i l i ty between Ibn al- AlqamI, the chief


49/179

40

minister of the Caliph, and the Davatdar.7l The la t te rtook advantage of ~ u s t a ~ i m s weakness and gathered agroup of vulgar people (avbash) round himself andtraubLe d ~ t e' people of Baghdad. He made a plot with someof the principle men to dethrone the Caliph in favourof some other prince of the 'Abbasid family. Ibn a l-'AlqamI came to know of the plot and \ larned the Caliph,but the Davatdar created a te r r ib le misunderstandingbetween the Caliph and Ibn al-'AlqamI and he himselfbecame the most t rusted off icer of the Caliphal court.

In 655/1257 A.D. Hulagu sent sorne representativesto the Caliph complaining that when he was fightingthe heret ics and asked the support of the Caliph, henever sent any army to side vth the Nongol soldiersagainst the Isma'I1Is. He wanted the Caliph toabdicate in favour of his son (may be bu al-'Abbas

A ~ a d and to come to the rtongol court or that theminister Sulaymanshah and the Davatdar should go tohim. 72

On the i r way back to Hulagu the representativesmet a large number of ordinary people outside the ci tyswearing at them. Moreover, they were carrying amessage from the Caliph concerning his strength andhis abil i ty to defeat Iran and Turan. This made Hulagu


50/179

4 1

furious and he said: There i s no doubt that the Caliphi s not enti t led to such a posit ion, and that is why he:.i s not honest with us. 173 After a long terr i fying blood-shed, Baghdad f inal ly fe l l and the Caliph was murderedon \vednesday the fourteenth of 9afar 656 A.lI.,February1258 A.D. in the vil lage of Waqf.7

According to a l historians ~ s I was a veryclose companion of HUlag and he \rias with the Mongolmaster during the expedition to Baghdad. 8ulag nowt reated him with special favour. He and his descendantsretained positions of t rust for some time in the house-hold of the Ilkhans. t i s said that , prior to theexpedition to Baghdad Hulag consulted on this matterwith ~ s I . However the nature of ~ s I s contributionto the fa l l of Baghdad remained relat ively obscure.

A very large number of works have been writtensince 1258 A.D. on the advent of the Mongols in Iranand Iraq, and consequently about TsI s cooperationwith them. Although many of them have repeated oneanother, there are a considerable number of differentaccounts about the role of TsI in the conquest ofBaghdad.

A few sources belong to the contemporary orvery nearly contemporary period of the Mongol rule in


51/179

42

the Middle East. The Tarikh-i J a h r u I l g ~ u s h a of JuvaynI(658/1259 A.D.), the Jami al-tavarIkh (710/1310 A.D.)the Tarikh-i Vaj*at .,al-I;raHrah (728/1327 A.D.), l-Fakhri (701/1301 A.D.), and TarIkh-i guzIdah (730/1329 A.D.), . are some of those which are now availablehere. JuvaynI s book, (the oldest source), the T r i k h ~ iguzidah, and al-FakhrI lack any mention of ~ u s i sinfluence in the f i l of Baghdad; but the two others, .as weIl as quite a few works written in l ter periods,give various information and interpretations of therole of ~ u s i in this matter. Two of the fair ly earlysources, the Tarikh-i Vajjaf 75 and the Jami,76 pointout that 1 sI said to Hulagu that he would replace theCaliph. ome authors such as ~ a f a d I and Ibn Shakirf i r ly praised him, and sorne others l ike Ibn al- Imadalijanbali, the author of Shadharat al-dhahab, and IbnTaymiyah condemned him and charged him with themassacre and bloodshed of the I1uslims during theMongol conquest of Baghdad. At any rate , there is nodoubt that 1 usi hadacertain amount of influence onhis l longol I1aster, but to discuss how ~ s i operated insuch a cr i t ic l circumstance as an adviser is themain point to be discussed in this vlork, and dealingwith this question will be the further stage of thisproject .


52/179

43

I I . s i s WorksI t was previously stated , referr ing to the

d


53/179

44

knowledge of observation, such as Mu ayyid al-DInU r ~ I who was in Damascus, Fakhr al-DIn K h i l a ~ I ofTif l i s Fakhr al-DIn MaraghI of M a u ~ I l , and Najm al

DIn DabIran of QazvIn. They chose l laraghah as theplace for the observations to be made, and appliedthemselves to th is task, making instruments anderecting buildings suitable for the purpose. Healso ordered them to bring books from Baghdad, Syria,

M a u ~ i l and Khurasan, and to put them in the placewhere they .. . ould make observations, so that the:whole affa i r went forward in excellent order. Thefame of this great JOrk spread throughout theworld. 1I80

TsI t ravel led from Maraghah three times: oncein 662/1263 A.D. to Baghdad, another time togetherwith Q u ~ b a17Din Shirazi Ca disciple of ~ s I s ) toKhurasan and QuhistB.n: 81 for two years (665-667/1266-1268 A.D.), and the l as t time,which was shortly beforehis death,he went to Baghdad. During these t r ips Tsisupervised the awqaf affairs and collected lhat booksand astronomical instruments were required and sent

8them to Maraghah.As is understood from his orks, Tsi was not

only an astrologer. His mastery in several f ields ofknowledge is well-recognized by special is ts . He haswritten books on these subjects: mathematics, astrology and astronomy, ethics, philosophy, commentary on


54/179

45

the Qur an, mineralogy, history, Islamic jurisprudence(f iqh), geography, medicine, education, logic,

g ~ ' ' ' ' ' n c ' t r ( T ::\ml)V.Lll\,;,.U... J _ . , poli t ical science, l i te ra ture andtheology, kalam. However, his major f ie lds aremathematics, astrology, logic,philosophy and theology.His works on these subjects are of considerable signi-ficance among scholars who refer to them as re l iablesources in the f ie ld . ~ s I s three-volume philosophicalbook, which is a commentary on Avicenna s al- Isharatwa al-TanbIhat, is one of his works which made himk r ~ o w n as a top medieval Islamic philosopher. By writingth is work, ~ s I linked pre-Mongol Islamic philosophyto the post-Mongol periode

e already mentioned several books which ~ s Iwrote on ethics and theology. His most famous Persianethical work is the Akhlaq-i NairI which compriseshis pol i t ica l and ethical ideas. The original bookwas wri t ten by Ibn l'liskawayh in Arabie, ent i ledKitah al- iharah. N a ~ i r al-Din, the commander ofQuhistan, gave i t to ~ u s r to t ranslate into Persian.

~ u s r translated i t but since he found i t devoid ofpoli t ics and economics,ijikmat-i MadanI Va ijikmat-iManzil, he wrote sections on these two subjects andmixed them with the other material of the book. s he


55/179

6

himself points out,83 in compiling th i s book he wasinspired by the Greek philosophers (Plato and A r i s t o t l ~and the i r Islamic commentators such as Farabi and IbnS 'Y - 841.na.

There i s another well-known work which hasbeen ascribed to ~ s i with a cer ta in amount of doubt.This Persian book, Ravfit al-Taslim ya TajaVVUrat, hasbeen writ ten on the I sma i l i ideas keeping Ism a i l is tyle . This kind of work has caused certain authors,e.g. Ivanow (cf . his introduct ion to the above book) tobe incl ined to the opinion tha t ~ s I was genuinely

l - 1 85an sma 1 1The theological works of ~ s I have obtained

the i r highest places among the Twelver s h l I community.His most comprehensive book in this f ie ld is cal ledTajrld a l - I t igad which has been commented by overten famous ant i or p r o - ~ s I theologians, the mostfamous, Ibn a l M u ~ a h h a r ~ i l l I ( 'Allamah).86 In th isbook and other theological books such as Imamat andFU l, ~ s I appears as an advocate of the sect ofthe T\Ilelvers an. condemns other Islamic sects .

We l ike ly refer to sorne others of ~ s I s booksoccasionally within the l a te r stages of this work. Thetvl recent ly publishe. Persian books on l- sI by


56/179

47

R a ~ a v I and ZanjanI comprise l i s t s and descriptions ofaI l his books. The interested students may refer to them.

I I I . s I s Religious ViewsTsI s views on religion are also a highly

disputed matter. s we mentioned ear l ier , he was bornand brought up in a family which observed the twelverShi ah fa i th , and his father was a m u ~ a d d i t h and faqIh.However for such a thinker as TsI i t would be naveto believe things jus t because his father believed inthem. He could not be sat isf ied with these simplebel iefs , and his curiosi ty caused him to think aboutand study the various opinions on different sects andschools. In the sources we find extremely differentopinions about TsI s own bel iefs . The twelver sh i Itheologians basing thei r views on TsI s theologicalbooks, praised him as a top centributor te the twelverShI ah theology and a fai thful twelver ShI I . IbnTaymIyah believes that TsI was a follower of the

u ~ a y r I y a h which is supposed to be a branch of theIsma I l i sect . 87

\Il Ivanow, a well-knovm sCholar, presents anumber of probabili t ies concerning TlisI s religious


57/179

48

ideas. One of these probabil i t ies i s that ~ s I couldnot be accepted by the Isma IIIs whilehe t reated themas heret ics . 88 I t is perhaps bet ter to put aside aI lthese divergent in terpretat ions, and base our judgementon the primary sources, namely the books and t rea t iseswhich are ascribed to ~ u s I himselfl.

At the beginning of his autobiography, Sayr Va-suluk, he hints at this matter. This i s a paraphrase of

~ u s i s words in his autobiography: COwing to fa te andaccident, l was born and t rained among those who weresubject to the external aspect of the Shari ah. 89 Myrelat ives knew nothing but th is . l was brought up withthem and the i r ideas. l could not think about any otherrel ig ion or sect , and believed that there could benothing else beside i t . However, my father, vlho was anexperienced and well-read man, less often exaggeratedin imitating the rel igious principles . He encouragedme to study ar ts science, and re l igion. l had thechance to meet Kaml al-Din uI;Lammad ijasib and studymathematics under him. He sometimes used to advise methat t is possible that those who are very ordinarypeople might be r ight in the i r \ Jays and opinions; there-fore l should not judge p o p ~ ~ s t by the i r appearancewhich mightbe ugly, but admit that they might be r ight .


58/179

49

Gradually l came to believe tha t whatever l hadso far believed was wrong, and tha t other people mustbe r ight , and 1 t r ied to find out the r ight group andthe r ight way. Since my professor went away and myfa ther died, l l e f t home90 and, following the adviceof my father , l t r ied to learn from any specia l is t inany f ie ld . But my own interest was to understand r ightfrom wrong, therefore l s tar ted to learn rat ionalkno\ rledge such as kalam theologyll and philosophy.Kalam did not appeal to me because l found thepossessors of th i s knowledge attempting to make wisdomsubject to the rel igious matters IIlhich they havelearned by imitat ion, taql id , of the i r predecessors.The only benefi t tha t l obtained from kalam was thatl came to knO ll1 the rel igious disputes. l understandthat the f i r s t argument among wise men concerninglmowledge of God and obtaining perfect ion (on whichone s fortune on the day of judgement depends) iswhether th i s aim (knO\ lledge of God) should be studiedthroush in te l lec t alone or by in te l l ec t under thesupervision of a teacher. The group which i s for thel a t t e r al ternat ive i s called I s ~ i l i . 9 l

After th i s introductory remark ~ s sees ther ight on the sie of the Ism a i l is , explaining tha t


59/179

50

people aIl over the world, though large in number arewrong and only the Ta IImIyah, the Isma IIIs , arer ight . 92

In th is book and his other works such as theAghaz va anjam, the Awaf al-ashraf , the Taeavvurat,the TUbfah and the R a w ~ a t al-Qulb, TsI appears as adefender of the Isma I I I sect . On the other hand,several other books which are ascribed to him werewritten in favour of the sect of the twelvers. HisFul, TajrId a l - I t iqad, and Imamat are among thosein which TsI defended the sect of the twelvers.

In his Fuul ~ s I openly sides with thetwelvers. He remarks that infa l l ib i l i ty has not beenclaimed for al Y but the Twelve Imams. I t is compulsoryfor people aIl over the world to follow them. 93 In aIlthe books which ~ s I wrote concerning the sect of thetwelvers, the arguments go exactly the same way asthose of the other twelver theologians. On the problemof the Islamic rule in society, he considers the Imamas the r ightful ruler . In provine the Imamat he, l ikeother shI I theologians, believes that: (1) l u ~ f kindness, is a necessary at t r ibute of God (2) theappointing of a ruler of human beings i s , according toreason, a necessary function of God (3) the Imam


60/179

5

shou1d be specified by the Prophet, (4) the Imam shou1dbe infa1lib1e, (5) the Twe1fth Imam i s in his greaterconcealment G ~ y b a t - i kubra).

In his argument about this prob em in thet rea t ise of Imamat,after proving that only the sect ofthe twelvers is r ight , he condemns the Isma i1is , andsays that they are outside the Is1amic community,because they be1ieve in the uncreatedness of bodies,qidam a1-ajsam, and other kinds of superst i t ions:They even say that the Imam shou1d be obeyed even i f

he is a 1iar , oppressor, \vine drinker, or adul terer . 94These two contradictory points which ~ u s I made

about the Isma I1Is have been thought to have been dueto various reasons, e.g. circumstances or a change ofopinion. Ja1al H u m a ~ I could not make up his mind about

~ u s i s real religious views. 9 should keep in mindthe fact that ~ u s I bi t te r ly cr i t ic i ses the Isma I lIs inhis introduction to the Akhlaq-i N a ~ i r I .

He remarks that he wrote the book, Akhlaq, ata time when he had been compelled to leave his nativeland for Quhistan: To save my l i f e and my honor, Nafsva Ir t i , l had to write an introduction to my book,appropriate to the Isma I lI customs while the contents


61/179

52

were contrary to the belief and opposite to the SharI ahand the Sunnah. After l was released from that unhappyplace, l noticed that copies of my book together withsuch introduction were being read by a number ofpeople. So l have to apologise asking them to removethat introduction and replace t with the presente.xordiu.m.,96

s one may notice, ~ u s I s regret concerningwhat he wrote in favour of the Quhistan master is quiteobvious. He very openly explains that in the f i r s tintroduction he praised the Isma IlIs in order to savehis l i f e and his honore I1oreover, as \ Je alreadyremarked,97 ~ u s complained repeatedly about thepressures which he had to suffer while ~ i t theIsma II Is .

Even in the Ta)lavvurat, one of the books whichi s saia to have been written in favour of theIsma I I I s ~ s I has hinted at the lack of f reedom andthe order of Imam for the precautionary concealment,tagiyah. 98

Another facet vmich i s obvious i8 that when~ s I talks in favour of the Isma I l Is , he i s not veryopen about the i th. n. asharI, the sect of the twelvers;


62/179

53

he never refutes t and he never denies the TwelgeImams, but in contrast , in speaking in favour of thesect of the twelvers, he not only speaks highly of i the seriously condemns the opposite sides and cal lsthem non-Muslim. This can be another indication of hisreal incl inat ion towards the sect of the twelvers.

The theological books that ~ u s I wrote on thebasis of the twelver ShI ah have received specialattent ion from the leading ShI ah scholars such as

M u ~ a q i q i ~ i l l I (602-676/ 1205-1277 A.D.), and ~ s Ihimself has been praised by them. 99

Now one may say that i f ~ u s I wrote his proIsma I1I books under the pressure of the Isma III leadem,why did he not express his regret about what he wrote,as he did about his f i r s t introduction to the Akhlaq-i1:@/iirI?

Concerning the foregoing points, plus the factthat no definite date i s reported for the compositionof his various works, that no chronology of ~ s r i saccessible, and that there is a great doubt about ~ s Ibeing the author of some of the books which are at t r i -buted to him (such as the Taj8-vvurat , i t can probablybe considered that matters went with ~ s I as follows:


63/179

54

(1) r.rsi was born into a T ~ w e l v e r family, and probably grew up asaTwelver, and as a young man l ebelieved in th i s sect .

(2) Later, as ~ u s himself te l l s us,lOO he wassearching for the t ru th , and thought that theIsma'I l sect possessed the t ru th , while hes t i l l did not completely turn away from thesect of the twelvers.

(3) ~ u s I found out that the sect of the twelvershas the t ruth, therefore he compiled a numberof theological books through which he provedthat the only r ight sect i s ~ h sect of thetwelvers. 10l

(4) ~ u s I wrote in favour of the Isma'I l bel iefsby force and against his personal opinion. (Hewas exercising tag..i.yah).

(5) ~ s regretted what he wrote in the in teres t ofthe Isma'I1Is af ter he was released from theIsma I l i for t resses by Hulagu.Therefore, we view ~ u s I as a twelver theologian

who has contributed a great deal in the Shi'ah-Sunnicontroversy concerning various matters, mainly theproblem of Imamat, Islamic rule, on I hich thecommunity i s based.


64/179

55

IV. s I s DeathAccording to Ibn a l - F u w a ~ I Ibn Shakir, and

R ~ a h I d al_DIn,102 ~ s I died in Baghdad in 672/1273 A.D.In another placel03 Ibn a l F u w a ~ i remarks that ~ s Icommitted suicide. In the chronology of the year672/1273 A.D., Ibn a l - F u v l a ~ i remarks that Abaqa han(ruled from 663/1264- A.D; together v th the commandersmilitary men and ~ s I went to Baghdad. l ~ t e r the winterwas over he went back to his capi ta l , Maraghah, but~ s I remained in Baghdad to inspect the awqaf. Heestablished revenues for the fugaha (the Islamicjur is ts ) , lecturers and mystics on the monthly basis.He reformed the awqaf and founded principles for i t

. . t h db ' . d . 1 104-Slnce l a een QlSorganlze preVlOUS y.~ s I died and was buried in r-Iashad

near Baghdad,burying place of I-1sa Ibn Ja fa r , the- 105Seventh Shl ah Imam.


65/179

CHAPTER Tl rJO

~ s I s ATTITUDE TO THE CALIPHAL POWER

I . us i , an Advocate of the Sect of the Twelvers

In the previous chapter a .few points weremade about ~ u s i s rel igious views. Although th i s isquite a broad subject and requires further study wecould consider him judging from his own words atvlelver Shi i v ho strongly supported this sectagainst the other Muslim sects . In talking about theImamat-; and the appointment of an Imam a ru ler ofthe Islamiccommunity he sides only with those whobelieved that the r ightful ru lers vIere the Twelve Imamsand that they were appointed by God through theProphet; this i s exactly what the twelvers believef

I t is weIl known that aI l Islamic sects andsemi-sects believe that a highly qualified man who isintel l igent should succeed the Prophet to rule thes ta te , and th is person should be called the khalifahor Imam. 2 But the disputes are concerned with the

56


66/179

57

defini t ion, the necessary conditions, the quali t ies andthe means of appointment of the successor to theProphet. In ta1king about the means of recogRition ofthe Imam, a ZaydI Mu tazi11 author has put for th inhis famous work, S h a r ~ Ui1 al-Khamsah, the followingview: People had disagreed about the Imamat. In ouropinion there i s the specification, ~ about t h ree / .Imams, and other Imams shou1d c1aim [ the i r Imamat] byrebel1ion. 3

After the Prophet, AlI Ibn AbI ~ a l i b ijasan,ijusayn, and f inal ly Zayd Ibn AlI Ibn al-ijusayn, arereco:gn:.ized as true Imans, and anyone who followed. thesefour could l a te r become an Imam .4 AI-TaftazanI (722-791/1322-1388 A. D.) who \ las a distinguished SunnIscholar5 believed th8t the Imam should be elected bythe community6 and does not have to:infallible .7 Thecommentator on a1-TaftazanI s book points out that i ti s not necessary for the Imam to be infa l l ib le orsuperior to the ruled. The Imam would not be deposed i fhe committed immoral conduct.8

Imam al-ijaramayn al-JuwaynI (419-478/1028-1085A D , a Shafi theologian, gives hL::; idea on the imam sdeposition in Kitab al-Irshad. He says that the idea of


67/179

58

Imamat i s not a substantial bel ief . 9 There i s no needfor consensus in establishing one for the Imamat; theagreement of the religious scholars i s suff icient . lOThe Mu tazilah say that i t i s based on contract as weIlas elect ion.

The I s m a ~ I I s believe that af ter the SeventhImam Ja far (died 148/765), his son Isma Il became theImam. Isma I l never dies unti l he succeeds in ruling

. 1 - 12the world, and he 18 the on y successor of the Imam.Hodgson says:

The IsmatIIIs linked the community less by r igidsymbols than by a l iving hierarchy of the learned:under the imam were ranged the supreme da I(summoner to the truth) and the subordinate da Isdovln to the private believers. 3

The sect of the twelvers, however, has differentideology about the rulership of the Islamic community.This sect believes that the Prophet appointed Ali IbnAbI ~ a l i b (died 40/C60 A.D.) as his immediate successorat the Ghadir celebration on his way back from theFarewell Pilgrimage in 11/632.14 After Ali , his sons,ijasan and ijusayn, \ lere the real Imams in the i r turn,and any other Imam was false. 15 Ali , the son of ijusayn(Zayn al- Abidln) was the fanth Imam who possessed


68/179

59

three qualifications, (1) his proved in fa l l ib i l i ty ,(2) the existence of the ShI'ah Mutawatir ~ a d t h s abouthis Imamat, and, (3) the prophetie t radit ions whichprove the Imamat for a l l ~ ~ l v Imams. 16 The Imamat ofthe other eight Imams has been proved more or less inthe same way.17 Therefore, in ShI'ah thought, thetwelfth t rue ruler (Imam or Caliph) i s Mahdi, the sonof al-ijasan al- 'AskarI . He established his rule overthe community in th is manner.

For various reasons he disappeared. However, heappointed his four specified agents, Nuwwab-i arba'ah.Donaldson states:

l for a period of about seventy years he wasrepresented on earth by wakIls, i . e . , by agents oradvocates. The f i r s t of these was Vthman ibn Sa'Id.When Vthman ..ied he vias succeeded by his son, AbuJa fa r , who in turn designated Abu'l- ~ a s i m ibn Ruh,who appointed Abu'l-ijdsan SamarrI. When the la t te rwas about to die they urged him to designate someonein his place, but he refused, and replied, Now thematter is with God.' Accordingly the period whenthe Hidd.en Imall vias represented by his wakils i sknovm as the IILesser Concealment, l9ughraJ, and th is period extended,frOID A.D. 869-940. Since that time

[Ghaybat-i-t i s said,the Shi i t e

l 1ahdi or the Hidden Imam has been in the GreatGoncealment,1I [Ghaybat-i KubraJ.18


69/179

60

At th is point the conception of the GeneralAgency, Niyabat-i Immah, came into existence. Afterthe fourth specified agent died, the Imam ordered thepeople to follow the Ulama of the day and said: Thosewho study ~ a d ~ t h and different iate between forbiddenand lawful things, and understand our law are to berecognized by the people, because l have appointed themas the i r rulers so those who f a i l to accept the i rrulership have rejected ours and consequently haverejected God s government,.19Thus other ru lersthe ShI ah is concerned, including b Bakr,20

as farUmar 21

and uthman22 were not legi t imate. From the r i se ofb Bakr (11/632) to the fal1 of Baghdad (656/1258),

everyone who made c1aim to the Imamat was not the r ightful ru1er, and his claim was abso1utely against thesp i r i t of Islam. 23

The foregoing 1ines, though brief indicatethe dissimi1ari ty between the sect of the twelvers andothers. One may question the pos i t ionmaCal iph such as

M u s t a ~ i m , for instance, among the BhI I community;what feelings, therefore might a twelver theologian1ike ~ s I have about a 1 - M u s t a ~ i m , the then Caliph ofthe Islamic world.


70/179

61

TsI, l ike other ShI 'Is , could not recognizethe Caliph as the legal ruler of the state which i ssupposed to be theocratic. Islamic rule i s the govern-ment of God. The legisla tor is God and the Qur'an i sHis Law and the Prophet is the executive authorityappointed by God. Unlike Western democracy whichpreserves the sovereignty of the people, in Islam thelaw is established n d ~ m e n t e d upon the basis ofre l iable sources for the public interest , whether theyl ike t or not, because the idea is that people are notquite aware of the i r best in terest , and sometimesunconsciously do harm to themselves. For this reasonthe Prophet used to address his people saying: '0God's servants You are l ike pat ients and od i s aphysician for you, therefore, what the physician knowsi s in your own in teres t , not what you pat ients- . ,24deS1re.

The idea of appointment of the ruler by odthrough tbe Prophet on which the SbI'ab re l ies is a l lbased on tbe conception of the theocratic state inwbicb the Muslim believes. TsI, as a sb I I pol i t ica land religious theorist , was an active advocate of th isidea. In classifying the different types of state andgovernment, ~ s speaks of two kinds, virtuous and


71/179

62

def ic ient governments. e says:The divisions of government are: Virtuous Govern

ment, also known as the Imamate, i t s purpose beingthe perfect ion of men, and i t s consequence theattainment of fe l ic i ty ; Deficient Government, alsoknown as Domination, i t s purpose being to enslavemankind, and i t s consequence the attainment ofmisery.1I 25

Through the above passage, ~ s l-ays s tressupon a virtuous s ta te which could only be formed underthe rule of the Imam. Hm'lever the understandings ofthe term IIImam l l are different among various Islamicsects . I t can be applied to a person who claims himselfas the Caliph of Islam, e.g. al-I1usta fiim. He, as weIlas other Caliphs, were recognized by the sunnis asImams. But ~ s seems to have been quite conscious indist inguishing between the sunni and the Shi I Imam.e points out:

l no one 'Vlould be able to undertake. . . [thegovernment] viithout a preponderance of discriminat ion and superiori y in knoviledge, for such a man' sprecedence over others without the occasion of somepart iculari ty would calI for s t r i fe and al tercat ion.Thus, in determining the enactments there is a needfor a person dist inguished from others by divineinspira t ion, in order tha t they should follow him.Such a person, in the terminology of the Ancients,


72/179

63

was called The Possessor of the Law and his enactments the Divine Law; the Moderns refer to him asthe Religious Lawgiver

Now in determining judgment, there i s need(also) for a person who is distinguished from othersby divine support, so that he may be able toaccomplish thei r perfection. Such a person, in theterminology of the Ancients was called an AbsoluteKing, and his judgments the Craft of Kingship; theModerns refer to him as the Imam and to his funct ion as the Imamate. 1126

In h is other book, the F u ~ l , ~ s I ident i f iesthe Imamat with the Twelve Imams and remarks that i t i scompulsory for a l l human beings to follow them. 27

Thus the point that V a ~ ~ a f and some otherhistor ians have made about ~ S i S correspondence withIbn a l - AlqamI concerning influencing the Caliph v thShI ah thought is quite understandable. ~ s I mighthave noticed that matters were going very badly inthe center of the Islamic s ta te , Baghdad, and theIslamic Caliphate vlaS being led by a person who wasnot well qualif ied for the position. Therefore he t r iedto take a step in favour of the sect of the t\velversto which he adhered. This correspondence, however, musthave been made in the early period of M u s t a ~ i m sreign when he had not yet become well-known as a


73/179

6

debauchee. I t does not seem l ikely for ~ u s to havenad hopes of converting the Oaliph who W3.S preoccupiedwith anything but Islamic affai rs in the l a t te r partof his Oaliphate.

The Oaliph had a harem with seven hundredwomen and Gne thousand,28 or one thousand threehundred29 servants. He passed his l i f e in debauchery.30These are Howarth s words:

l musicians, dancers, tumblers, beinghis chief companions. His ari ogance was a match forhis imbecility.1I3 l

He was greedy for gold. He had pricelesstreasures in h is court, and he was never 1t,illing tospend them. On the order of Hulag the court wasinspected and a pool f i l l ed with red gold was fObnd. 32TusI 'Trites 33 that Hulagu offered him a plate of goldasking him to eat i t The Oaliph said that he couldnot eat gold: l Ihy did you keep t then? Hulijgu said,vlhy did not you give i to your soldiers to go to

the JaYQun to fight us and to keep us away? V a ~ ~ a fwrites that the Oaliph ,vas passing his time in immoralconduct, 1tlith such things which are morally forbiddeneven for kings, l e t alone for an Imam whom the Muslims

4a l l over the world are expected to obey.


74/179

Most, i f not a l l of the early histor ians,agreed that l'1usta' m was not a good ruler . They saidthat he was a man of unsound judgment and of l i t t l e

65

experience of affairs of s tate . He had no weight amongthe people, and knew nothing about the facts . Most ofhis time was spent in l i s tening to music. He wassurrounded and influenced by a number of ignorant andlow people. His minister, Ibn al-'AlqamI was the onlylise man around him, but he could not be active; his

advice was rejected, he was expecting his dismissala l l the time. 35 He was dominated by the women at court,

~unaware of what was to be done for the s ta te .? TheCaliph JaS far from knowledge, policy and aVlareness,and had l i t t l e ambition, e i n ~ in love with money, andcareless about the state affa i rs and dependent onothers. 37

The author of Jami' al-TavarIkh does not t e l lus muoh about 11usta' and his

Date post:	04-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	azri-zaini
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

His Supposed Political Role in the Mongol Invasion of Baghdad

Documents