-={}[Thread]{}=-

The history of Shi’ism in Medīna

One of the topics that have always interested me since I resided in Hejaz is the Shi’i presence in the region, most notably: Medina.

The Shi’a in Medina have a decent presence today in a few neighborhoods of the city; however, many do not know about the school’s underlying history in the city.

This will be a rough outline of its history in the region.

The earliest mention of the Shia in Medina I have come across is a few minor tabi’is who died at the end of the 1st century.

The concept had not fully matured yet, and the term back then simply denoted a greater affinity to Ali and perhaps a preference of him over Uthman.

It does not seem to be a prevailing sentiment in Medina, as only a handful of individuals were described among the early Shia of the city.

Similarly, some of this Shi’i presence is clearly due to some influx of travel between Medina and Kufa.

Nevertheless, a bit later in history, we find the sentiment evolving. A bit more extreme strain of Shi’ism is seen among a few transmitters (who were mostly disparaged).

- Haram b. ‘Uthman al-Madani (d. 136)

Al-Shafi’i said: “Transmitting hadith from Haram is haram.”

He was described as an extreme Shi'ite by Ibn Hibban, and he was accused of forging several reports which he exclusively transmitted.

Other names start appearing a bit after this time as well:

- Ibrahim b. Abi Yahya (d. 184), another suspect forger accused of fabrication.

He was described as a “Rafidi” by Ibn Ma’in, and it was reported that he used to curse some of the Salaf as well.

Other transmitters from this general era were accused of being Shi’is, such as Ibn Ishaq (d.150), Hisham b. Sa’d (d. 160) and others etc.

Until this point, it seems like the sentiment was a minority in the city, and it seemed like different strands of Shi’ism seemed to have simultaneously existed as well.

This seemed to be the case for quite some time.

Eventually, it seems like the sentiment expanded in its presence and found refuge in certain vicinities of the city.

The 4 century hadith critic, al-Daraqutni, mentioned a report from the Medinite descendent of al-Husayn, Muhammad b. ‘Ubaydillah b. Tahir al-‘Alawi.

Al-Alawi told al-Daraqutni: “My grandfather, Tahir, once took me by my hand and toured me through the city, showing me the homes of the Prophet’s companions.

He would say, ‘This house was for such-and-such,’ until he arrived to several ruined houses.

/1

He told me: ‘you see these ruined houses? They were merely ruined as a result the revilement of the Prophet’s companions!”

Su’alat al-Sulami p. 359

A revolt notably took place in the city in 271 as well, led by two grandchildren of Ja’far al-Sadiq against Abbasid authorities.

Ibn Khaldun said:

“They revolted in Medina in 271. They spilled blood and robbed wealth; and they massacred the household of Ja’far b. Abi Talib. Al-Medina remained for 1 month without a jum’a or a congregation for prayer.”

In 463, a dynasty that descended from Ali, known as Āl Muhannā, ruled the city.

Their rule persisted in the city for several centuries, and it began shortly after an era described by Massignon “the Isma’ili century.”

In it, the Muslim world was predominantly ruled by Shi’i dynasties.

The Fatimids consolidated rule in Egypt, North Africa & parts of the Levant. The Qurmutids had control over much of East Arabia & the surrounding regions. The Buyids assumed rule in Iraq & parts of Persia...

The Zaydi imam, Yahya b. Al-Husain al-Rassi (d. 298), similarly departed from his homeland in Jabal al-Rass (west of Medina), and successfully invaded Sa’dah in Yemen, where he established the first Zaydi dynasty in the region.

Nevertheless, Āl Muhannā of Medīna were described by al-Qalqashandi that “they were all upon the madhab of the Imami Rafidah, who believe in in 12 imams...”

Ibn Khaldun similarly mentioned that a “Rafidi” dynasty was established by the descendants of Muhanna.

This time came after the evolution and emergence of the Twelver school, and it seemed to have eventually become the predominant school in Medina.

Ibn Hazm (d.456) when critiquing the Maliki principle of ‘Amal Ahl Al-Medina, lamented the fact that the people of Medina at his time “were predominantly overrun by Fisq and even disbelief, from the extreme Rawafid.”

In 580, the Muslim explorer, Ibn Jubayr, arrived to Medina and resided in it for 5 days.

He mentioned that he observed many innovations on Friday, which he lamented, and he also mentioned that the imam of Friday prayer in the mosque was of a “disapproved madhab.”

It is apparent that the Shi’i presence in the city remained strong & noteworthy.

Some sources quote Abu Bakr b. Yusuf al-Najjar mentioning that he visited Medina in 666, & that he didn’t find anyone named Abu Bakr & Aisha in it.

I wasn’t able to find a primary source for that.

Eventually, the rule and authority of Āl Muhannā became weak. We thus see a rise in Mamluk power in Medina, which was quite apparently opposed to Shi’ism.

In 672, the خطابة and authority to give sermons was taken from the prominent Shi’ite household of Āl Sinān, and it was given to the Shafi’i jurist, Siraj al-Din al-Ansari al-Damanhuri.

[Al-Nasihah by Ibn Farhun p.90]

On the 18th of Dhu al-Hijjah of 750, the Husaynid prince of the city, Sa’d b. Thabit b. Jammaz, issued a decree to bar anyone from issuing judicial verdicts except the Shafi’i judge, Shams al-Din b. Al-Sab’.

Al-Sakhawi commented: “it is since that day that their affairs (the Shia) came to an end, and they were fully barred. The matter of the Sunnah became supreme, and the word was united, and we found supporters for the Truth...”

The status of the Shi’i community in Medina continued to dwindle.

Al-Samhudi mentioned that the Mamluk Sultan, Jaqmaq (d.857), issued an order to ban Shi’ite funerals from being prayed upon inside al-Masjid al-Nabawi, and an exception was given to the Ashrāf.

Al-Wafa 2/103-104

Eventually, the school became a minority in the city, as it is today.

The Shi’a of Medina today are referred to as النخاولة, and they are of disputed origins.

The Nakhwalis are generally known to have a darker complexion, which seems to attest to some possible African roots.

I remember being surprised in Medina as I came across several Nakhwalis, who looked African, dressed as Saudis, and prayed according to Twelver jurisprudence.

I only learned of their history later in my life.