|
|
DISKUS Vol.4, No.1 (1996) pp.11-22
Cosmology and authority in medieval Ismailism
Simonetta Calderini
Lecturer in World Religions and Islamic Studies
Department of Theology and Religious Studies
Roehampton Institute London
Southlands College
Wimbledon Parkside
London SW19 5NN
--------------------------------------------------------------
ABSTRACT
Though it is widely assumed that Sunni Islam does not have an equivalent to the Christian
ecclesiastical hierarchy, Shii groups such as the Medieval Ismailis did have an organised
teaching, spiritual, and temporal hierarchy. Evidence gathered from primary sources shows
that this Ismaili 'ecclesiastical' hierarchy is strictly intertwined with the Ismaili
interpretation of Neoplatonic cosmology as well as with the political authority of
prominent medieval Ismaili dynasties.
--------------------------------------------------------------
[DISKUS note: For readers who know Arabic
[the diacritic ' is used in this paper to indicate
["Ayn" while the diacritic ` indicates "Hamza".
[You may delete this note from your personal
[copy of DISKUS without infringing copyright.
It is widely accepted by scholars in Islamic studies that there is no ecclesiastical
hierarchy in Islam or, in other words, that there is not one hierarchical body which can
legislate in matters of religion and the authority of which is undisputed among Muslims.
There are experts in religious matters, the 'ulama`, with their theological and legal
specializations. However, these are only individuals, and no matter how highly esteemed
they are, they do not represent a full body. Even when Muslim scholars have presented
elaborations of Islamic creeds, it is understood that they are no more than individual
formulations of belief, not official ones.
This assumption perpetuates a myth: the myth of one, static, uniform and united Islam.
This is the Islam that many Sunnis would like to believe exists, and the Islam that
several Western scholars find more convenient to study. Recent introductory books on Islam
have just started to include chapters which reflect a more accurate story: there is not
one Islam, there are several Islams, or to put it more moderately, there are several
interpretations of Islam. There is the mystical way, with its hierarchy of spiritual
masters and angels, there is popular Islam with its hierarchy of saints, and there is Shii
Islam. Even though Shiism represents only 10% of the total Muslim population, it is
nevertheless very active, articulated and in itself composite.
This paper examines the authority of the "ecclesiastical" hierarchy, that is the
teaching, spiritual and temporal hierarchy, in Medieval Ismailism. My aim is to establish
a relationship between this hierarchy and the cosmological doctrines of Medieval
Ismailism. Even though Ismailism is not the only Shi'i group in Islam to exibit both an
ecclesiastical hierarchy and a related cosmological structure (medieval Druze and Nusayri
groups are two further examples), it has been chosen here because of the high degree of
sophistication and the clarity in which these doctrines have been expressed.
The Ismailis are a Shii group which originated during the 9th century and developed in
some provinces of Iraq, Syria and Iran. They belong to the Sevener branch of the Shia (as
opposed to the majority Shii branch of the Twelvers) and recognize the authority of a
series of 7 imams, the last of whom is - according to the majority Nizari branch, the
present Aga Khan Karim, the 49th in the line of Nizari Ismaili imams. The total number of
Ismailis today is uncertain, varying according to different sources, from 1 million to 20
million. They are distributed in several countries in the Middle East as well as in Asia
and Africa; in the present century, as a result of political and economic emigration, they
also settled in America, especially Canada, and Europe. The Ismaili community in the UK is
the largest in Europe (ca. 10,000) <1>.
Ismaili doctrinal and political influence reached its climax between the 10th and 12th
centuries, and is mainly represented by two Ismaili dynasties which ruled over Egypt,
Tunisia, regions of Syria, Iran and the Yemen. They are the well-known Fatimid dynasty
based in Cairo (909-1171) and the lesser-known Sulayhi dynasty in the Yemen (1038-1138).
As a branch of Shiism, Ismailism recognizes the authority of the Imam, who, after the
Prophet Muhammad, is the representative of God on earth. The imam is both the spiritual
and political leader of the community, he is appointed either by the Prophet (as in the
case of Ali), or by the preceding imam. He has to be male, pious, and of a specific
descent. He is infallible and the only official interpreter of Scripture.
When the Fatimid dynasty was in its hey-day, the imam was the political and religious
figure-head of an articulated hierarchical structure every member of which was responsible
to his own superior and thus directly to the imam. Changes, however, did occur and, in the
case of Tayyibi Yemen, the dignitary below the imam, the Da'i Mutlaq, did in practise
become the head of the hierarchy, while the imam was doctrinally still referred to, but
declared to be "in hiding".
The Ismaili ecclesiastical hierarchy was not believed to be a man-made organization,
invented solely to meet some specific needs of the Ismaili community; it was felt to be
part of a whole structure of beings and things which reflected the harmony and the order
of the universe. According to a widespread medieval "ideology", in the Middle
East as well as in Europe down to Elizabethan times, there was a pervasive sympathy
between the various components of the universe. Order, and therefore hierarchy, were to be
found in the structure of the skies, in the organs of the human body and in society. One
hierarchy reflected the other and parallels were often drawn between metaphysical,
theological and social structures <2>.
For this paper I am going to concentrate on the cosmologies elaborated mainly by two
Ismaili scholars, Hamid al-din al-Kirmani (d. 1021) and al-Mu`ayyad fi`l-din al-Shirazi
(d. 1077); both are representative of the ideology of the Fatimid dynasty and therefore of
its spiritual and political authority.
Ismaili cosmologies in general, and the cosmologies of al-Kirmani and al-Shirazi in
particular, are Neoplatonic. It seems that Neoplatonism was introduced into Ismaili
doctrine as early as the end of 9th century, by one al-Nasafi (d. 943) and was then widely
adopted by the Iranian branch of Ismaili intellectuals.
This early Neoplatonism consisted of a hierarchical system to explain the relation between
the One and the existence of multiplicity. At the top of the hierarchy was the One, which
was transcendent and beyond qualification, and it was followed by the Intellect and then
the Soul, which, with its imperfection, was the cause for the material world. In Plotinus
the whole process was one of emanation: from the overflow of the One derived the
Intellect, and so on, in a process which was neither active nor intentional.
But this passivity could not be accepted by a prophetic religion of salvation like Islam.
Consequently, Ismaili scholars modified the Neoplatonic system by starting the emanative
process not at the level of the One, but at that of the Intellect. So the Intellect became
the cause of emanation, but did itself not emanate from the One, it was instead originated
by the One atemporally through the Divine Word. Emanation then occurred from the Intellect
to the Soul, from the Soul to Nature, and to the elemental qualities. The hierarchy of
emanation was a hierarchy of value and perfection, the Intellect was perfect, but the Soul
was less so, imperfection (evil) being caused by distance from the source of origination
<3>.
Kirmani followed the distinction between origination from the One and emanation from the
Intellect; he called the One in more theological terms (al-muta'ali), that is the Highest/
the Transcendent [See TABLE I] <4>. However, he modified the early Neoplatonic
scheme by getting rid of the soul and multiplying the Intellect. From the One, through
origination, occurred the First Intellect, and from this, through emanation, the second
Intellect. From the Second Intellect emanated the Third, which was the origin of the
material world. The emanative process was complete with the 10th Intellect.
This scheme is not as artificial as it may seem to us. For Kirmani and his contemporaries,
such a "philosophical" hierarchy fitted very well with the current version of
Ptolemaic cosmology, according to which the Universe was made of nine or ten concentric
spheres, arranged in hierarchical order, from coarse (the earth) to subtle (the sphere of
the spheres) [See TABLE II] <5>.
So far we have seen two hierarchies, that is two schemes, whether the language was
philosophical or cosmological, by which value was assigned to specific members as parts of
a whole <6>. These hierarchies reflect a universal harmony and order which is
ordained by God. Order is achieved when everything is put in its natural place, that is in
the place intended by and assigned to it by God. Knowledge is nothing else but knowing the
natural place of things and beings. Order and harmony were to be found in the universe as
a whole and in every one of its elements. Order was in the heavens, as we saw, in nature,
where the generations from mineral to vegetal to animal culminate in the human being.
Order was in the human body with a hierarchy of organs (from leading organs like the heart
and the brain to servant organs) as well as in society, with a leader on the one hand and
his followers on the other.
In these hierarchies of beings, where does man stand? And how can he know his natural
place? As culmination of the animal generation man embodies all the generations below it,
his body being made of mineral, and vegetal elements. At the same time, through his soul,
man partakes of the spiritual, divine world and it is towards this world that his aim
ought to rest. However, because, alone among all creatures, man is endowed with
rationality and has the power to choose, he needs a guide to direct him to his natural
place.
Such guidance is provided by religion, which is the link between the spiritual and the
material world, between God and man. In particular, guidance occurs through the religious
institution of persons whose task is to regulate the affairs of mankind and to implement
the divine-natural law. For the Ismailis, this institution is represented by the Ismaili
da'wa <7>.
Historically, the Ismaili da'wa was instrumental in paving the way to the establishment of
the Fatimid dynasty. When in power, the dynasty, unlike other dynasties before it (such as
the Abbasids), did not get rid of its propaganda organization, but still relied on it
especially with regards to education (training of religious ranks, but also collection of
religious taxes) and propaganda itself (which was never for mass conversion, but
functioned as external relation of the dynasty, including trade) <8>.
During Kirmani's lifetime, the Fatimid imam al-Hakim (reign. 996-1021) relied heavily on
the da'wa to maintain his authority, by expanding its organization and making it separate
(almost independent) from the administrative and judicial authority. A new title was
created for its leader: the da'i al-du'at <9>.
Doctrinally, this emphasis on the da'wa is reflected in the elaboration of a neat
hierarchical system which represented the link between the philosophical/metaphysical
world and the physical, material world. This link was called by scholars "the world
of religion", which was structured according to the hierarchy of the Ismaili da'wa.
Kirmani was one of those Ismaili intellectuals (and da'is) responsible for the doctrinal
elaboration of such an intermediary world.
Following the divine, universal order and harmony, the ecclesiastical hierarchy mirrored
all other hierarchies; it was composed of 10 ranks and was a hierarchy of value where each
rank had its rationale in the rank above itself. [See TABLE III: ecclesiastical hierarchy]
<10>
Ranks 1,2,3, are comprehensive ranks, like the outer spheres of the universe are
comprehensive spheres (sphere of the fixed stars, sphere of the spheres and the embracing
sphere), while the remaining ranks are equated with the 7 planets.
The first rank, the Prophet of the present cycle, Muhammad, is the lawgiver and the
Scripture giver, while the Asas, Ali, is the interpreter of both law and Scripture. In the
philosophical hierarchy the first rank (first Intellect) was the cause for the existence
of the other intellects. Similarly, in the ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Prophet is the
cause for the existence of all the other ranks (which are called the natural intellects).
In the philosophical hierarchy there was a difference of coming-into-being between the
First Intellect (originated) and the other Intellects (emanated). Similarly, in the
ecclesiastical hierarchy, the Prophet is chosen by God, while all the other ranks are
appointed by the preceding rank. Therefore, emanation is equated to the appointment of
imams <11>.
Kirmani himself gives a graphic example of this parallelism, as well as others, in a
scheme of superior ranks and inferior ones. [See TABLE IV] <12>. The categories are
philosophical in the first column, cosmological in the second, ecclesiastical in the third
and theological/doctrinal in the last column. Every rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy
has a specific task to carry out within his/her own doctrinal capabilities.
It is unclear to what extent these ecclesiastical ranks actually reflected existing ranks
at any given time or in any particular area of Ismaili propaganda. These terms do occurr
in several Ismaili and non-Ismaili texts from an early date not necessarily in the same
order as the one provided by Kirmani. Moreover, several synonyms existed for some of the
ranks (f. e. janah/da'i).
What is of relevance here is that a hierarchy did exist from early times (well before the
establishment of the Fatimid dynasty) and that the principle underlying the whole system
was the concept of obedience.
Every Ismaili author makes this point very clear; Kirmani, for example, says that
obedience to the highest living authority, that is the imam, is equivalent to obedience to
God <13> Furthermore, obedience to the ranks as a whole is also equivalent to
obedience to God <14>.
Authority and obedience in Ismailism are related concepts; this relation is familiar for
scholars of religion. Authority, that is the right to command and to be obeyed, is
according to Ismailism, of divine origin. Ultimate authority lies with God and, at the
same time, the existing authority was instituted by God itself.
In Ismaili terms, all hierarchies in the universe come from God and the ecclesiastical
hierarchy, the da'wa, is - as we saw- the essential link between God and the individual
believer. To resist the authority of the da'wa or to rebel against it, is to rebel against
God.
Christian scripture describes in similar terms authority and obedience: "Whoever
rejects you rejects me, and whoever rejects me, rejects the One who sent me" (Luke
10.16). Medieval Christian monastic orders made obedience to the superior the basic
element of life within monastic communities. There, as in Ismailism, obedience served the
purpose of strenghtening the cohesion of the community under the authority of a
representative of the divine <15>.
Al-Mu`ayyad fi'l-din al-Shirazi (d. 1077) was another leading da'i of the Fatimid dynasty.
His doctrinal system differs slightly from Kirmani's, especially with regards to the
number of hierarchical ranks and the function of the philosophical hierarchy. However, he
develops the concept of obedience already present in Kirmani and takes it a step forward:
each rank of the ecclesiastical hierarchy hides, in potentiality, a superior rank. In
particular, each rank is potentially the imam, the highest living authority. As a result,
rebellion to any rank, even the lowest, is like rebelling against the Imam and,
ultimately, God itself <16>.
This concept of obedience to the rank above became the key to the cosmology and authority
structure of Yemeni Tayyibi Ismailism (1131-1539). During the last years of the Sulayhi
dynasty in Yemen, Queen Arwa broke her allegiance to the Fatimid line of Imams, thereby
making her da'wa independent from that of Fatimid Egypt. The imam Tayyib was declared to
be in hiding in 1130 and Queen Arwa appointed a da'i mutlaq (Missionary general) to
represent him and to look after the da'wa and the community. After the death of Queen Arwa
and the end of the Sulayhid dynasty, the Missionary General became the highest living rank
and his position became hereditary.
Doctrinally, Tayyibi scholars make the concept of obedience to the rank superior to one's
own of paramount importance. Obedience to one's superior is obedience to God: he who does
not acknowledge the superiority of the rank above one's self, falls from his position and
descends to lower levels <17>.
Cosmologically and philosophically, obedience is the key to the understanding of the
origin of the material world. This is exemplified by the so-called drama in heaven (of
gnostic origin): the Third Intellect, while acknowledging the excellence of the First
Intellect, hesitated in recognizing the precedence of the Second Intellect. This
hesitation was the cause of its deficiency. Because the First Intellect was hidden in the
Second Intellect, this hesitation became disobedience and caused the Third Intellect to
fall from its position. From it derived the nine spheres, while from the Second Intellect
derived the other Seven Intellects <18>.
It is interesting here to note the relationship between a new minority group and the
elaboration of an appropriate cosmology. What is at stake is the preservation and the
identity of a minority group, which needs a strong social grip to continue and exist. The
group exercises this grip on its members by developing a strong sense of hierarchy and
duty.
The same happened in Ismailism when it needed to maintain its identity within Islam. It
also happened in Tayyibi Ismailism when it wanted to differentiate itself from Fatimid
Ismailism.
A final comment needs to be made about this relationship between the concept of authority
within a community and the elaboration of its cosmologies <19>. We have seen that in
the case of Fatimid and Tayyibi Ismailism such a relationship did indeed exist. But which
influenced which? Did the community, and therefore the concept of authority, influence
cosmology? Or vice-versa?
Sociologists would support the first argument: they would take the community and its
social structure as the prototype for the elaboration of cosmology.
In my opinion this approach constitutes a misinterpretation of the underlying worldview of
medieval Islam (and of course of Medieval Christendom). For an Ismaili of the Middle Ages
order and hierarchy were not superimposed by the community, nor were they artificial or
man-made. Rather, order and hierarchy were natural and divine.
Only when they stop being perceived as natural and divine, can order and hierarchy be
interpreted as social or political constructs. (Only) then order stops being expressed by
authority, and becomes instead power and oppression.
--------------------------------------
|