«تقابل دو گفتمان در مناسبات دین و قدرت در واقعه عاشوراء: تحول اندیشه سیاسی در ۵۰ سال نخست بعد از پیامبر (ص)» (۶ جلسه)
دکتر حسن انصاری
موسسه مطالعات پیشرفته، پرینستون، نیوجرسی

▪️مجموعه ویدیوی جلسات اول تا ششم در یوتیوب

۲۱ جولای تا ۶ آگست ، ۲۰۲۴
انجمن مسلمانان شیعه ام آی تی (مؤسسه فناوری ماساچوست)

#تحول_اندیشه_سیاسی_۵۰_سال_بعد_از_پیامبر

«تقابل دو گفتمان در مناسبات دین و قدرت در واقعه عاشوراء: تحول اندیشه سیاسی در ۵۰ سال نخست بعد از پیامبر (ص)» (۶ جلسه)
دکتر حسن انصاری
موسسه مطالعات پیشرفته، پرینستون، نیوجرسی

چکیده:
در اين سلسله درسگفتار به موضوعات زير پرداخته ايم:

۱) بعد از رحلت پيامبر اعظم (ص) مسلمانان چه تصوری از جايگاه پيامبر در مدينه داشتند؟ مفهوم جانشينی/ خلافت پيامبر چگونه شکل گرفت و نقش فتوحات در ساختن آن چه بود؟ ۲) مسلمانان بلافاصله بعد از رحلت پيامبر (ص) چه نسبتی ميان قدرت و حاکميت بر سرزمين اسلام با دين و مرجعيت دينی/ وحی/ طاعت دينی بر قرار می کردند؟ ۳) قتل عثمان و عصر "فتنه" و حوادث بعد از آن چه تأثيری در تحول مفهوم خلافت گذاشت؟ ۴) نقش دوران خلافت امير المؤمنين و همچنين حادثه کربلا در شکلگيری مفهوم تازه ای از جانشينی پيامبر (ص) و شکلگيری مکتب اهل بيت در برابر مکتب سقيفه/ خلافت چه بود؟ ۵) مفاهيم سياسی/ دينی "جماعت"، "طاعت"، "سنت"، "شورا"، "اولوا الأمر" و برخی مفاهيم ديگر در زمينه تحولات سياسی دو قرن اول مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. ۶) نسبت بين دين و قدرت در ساخت نظام حقوقی و فقهی دستگاه خلافت تا عصر شافعي مورد بحث قرار گرفت و درباره تحول تدريجی مفاهيم و منابع شریعت و اراده معطوف به قدرت خلفاء در اين زمينه مفصلا بحث شد؛ از جمله بحث درباره سیر تاریخی بحث از منابع فقه (قرآن، سنت، اجماع، اجتهاد الرأی، قياس). ۷) تأثير دوران خلافت حضرت امير (ع) و حادثه کربلاء در شکل دادن به فلسفه دينی/ سياسی متمایزی که در آن معانی تازه ای برای جانشينی پيامبر (امامت)، سنت پيامبر (ص) و نقش حکومت در اداره جامعه شکل گرفت و مخالفت با حاکميت دستگاه خلافت مشروعیت یافت مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. ۸) از سه جريان اصلی در دويست سال اول اسلام بحث کرديم: ۱) جريان اصلی دستگاه خلافت، ۲) جريان مرجعيت اهل حديث و "سنت" / جريان ادبيات " احکام السلطانية" (که با وجود پذيرش "طاعت" خليفه در امر سياسی به تدريج مرجعيت دينی و يا اراده معطوف به قدرت او در دخالت در امر دينی و شريعت را به چالش کشيد) و ۳) جريان مکتب اهل بيت (ع)/ تشيع امامی.

۲۱ جولای تا ۶ آگست ، ۲۰۲۴
انجمن مسلمانان شیعه ام آی تی (مؤسسه فناوری ماساچوست)

#تحول_اندیشه_سیاسی_۵۰_سال_بعد_از_پیامبر

@azbarresihayetarikhi
@zekrMIT

Special Topics, Muharram 2025

🌐 Hybrid, in English

Date
Friday July 11th, 2025
6:45 pm to 9:30 pm (Eastern Time)

Location
MIT Tang Center, E51-395, 2 Amherst St, Cambridge, MA 02142

Schedule
6:45-7:00 Ziyarat Ale-Yasin
7:00-8:30 Lecture, in English, Dr. Farhad Ghoddoussi (joining by zoom)
Title: "A Brief Look to the Tawwabin Movement (The Penitents)"
8:30-8:40 Q&A
8:45-9:05 Prayer
9:05-9:30 Dinner

- About Speaker (Bio)

Zoom Participation (hybrid):
https://mit.zoom.us/j/95948516788

https://sites.mit.edu/zekrmit/
@zekrMIT

Abstract:
The Tawwabin (التوابين, "The Penitents") was a significant Shia movement that emerged in the aftermath of the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE, driven by collective guilt and the desire for atonement among the Shia supporters of Kufa who felt they had failed Hussein ibn Ali by not responding to his calls for support. This movement represented one of the earliest organized attempts to seek revenge for the martyrdom of Hussein ibn Ali, the grandson of Prophet Muhammad, and became a defining moment in early Shia history.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIsPaBFV53Y&list=PLRagz8v-1fF7_AqcNeT2M9iFTWu86TL0m&t=1s

"Qur'an and Yemen: Looking at the Quranic Verses related to Pre-Islamic South Arabia", Lecture 3
speaker: Dr. Farhad Ghoddoussi
May 26, 2025

#Quran_Pre_Islamic_South_Arabia

Session 3 (1/1):
In this third lecture of the Qur'an and Yemen lecture series, we briefly looked to the geography and history of South Arabia including Yemen (Kingdoms of Himyar, Saba' and Hadramawt) and Ethiopia (also called Aksum Empire, Abyssinia or Habesha) starting from the last quarter of 3rd century to the end of first quarter of 6th century.

The main large-scale geopolitical background to the history of these two regions, Yemen and Ethiopia is the rivalry between the two superpowers of that time Roman (Byzantine) and Persian (Sassanid) empires. This rivalry manifested itself in two alliances. Byzantine Empire, Ghassanid Christian Arab kingdom, and Aksum (Ethiopian) Empire formed one alliance, and Sassanid Empire, Lakhmid Christian Arab Kingdom, and Himyar dominated kingdom in Yemen formed the other alliance. Arab tribes interior and peripheral regions of Arabia, occasionally joined or have loose connections with one of these alliances.

Around 280AD Shammar Yuhar'ish residing at the Himyar capital Zafar got the control of the Saba' and Hadarmawt kingdoms and unites Yemen under Himyarite rule which lasted for more than 200 years.

At about 345AD the Ethiopian king Ezana converts to Christianity. In 383AD the Himyarite king Malkikarib Yuha'min and his sons embraced monotheism. There monotheism was more inclined toward Judaism which is an indication that Himayarite Kings of Yemen were keen to carve and save a separate and distinct identity from Aksumite rulers for themselves.

Around 500AD, the kingdom of Himyar, seemed powerful. However, it was then for reasons its details are not clear, it became a tributary of Aksum. This reversal, which probably began in around 500-515AD, seems to have been completed by the reign of Ma'dikarib Ya'fur (519-522), who was placed on the throne by the Aksumites, was Christian, and in switching alliance from Sassanid alliance to Byzantine alliance launched a military campaign against Arab tribes which were auxilaries of Sassanids in lower 'Iraq, with the support of Arab auxiliaries of Byzantium.

But some of the Yemeni tribes were not happy with this change of alliance and religion. At the death of Ma'dikarib Ya'fur, which can be dated between June 521 and June 522, a coup de force brought to power a prince named Joseph (Saba'ic: Yusuf As'ar Yath'ar, Arabic: Zur'a dhu Nuwas).

Joseph succeeded in killing the 300 Aksumites who were in garrison at Zafar, the Himyarite capital, and set fire to their church.

At the same time, he sent an army under the command of a Jewish prince called Sharah'il Yaqbul dhu-Yaz'an against the oasis of Najran, which did not recognize his authority.

At the time, the population of Najran included pagans and Jews, but it was dominated by Christians. Those Christians belonged to two different and antagonistic Christological denominations of Nestorians and Monophysites, which were sympathetic to Persian and Byzantine Empires respectively.

In June and July 523, Sharah‘il, who was in command of an army of King Joseph, began the blockade of Najran, but there he met with strong resistance. He was then joined by King Joseph, who promised to respect the lives of the dissidents if they offered him their submission. The promise was not kept: a great number of Christians, all of Byzantine allegiance it seems, were executed,in particularly their leader called al-Harith son of Ka'b (in Greek, Arethas). According to the accounts in Syriac and Greek, this massacre was committed in November 523.

According to the Martyrdom of Arethas, the Byzantine emperor Justin I (518-527), having heard about the events in Najran, sent a letter to the Aksumite king Kaleb Ella (Asbeha) inviting to "attack, by land or by sea, the abominable and criminal Hebrew" to take revenge for the martyrs of Najran.

Kaleb's army left Aksum after Pentecost 525. King Joseph was killed while trying to oppose its landing. His death precipitated the crushing defeat of the Himyarite army. Joseph's death definitively ended the independence of the kingdom of Himyar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9JOhRpUrSY&list=PLRagz8v-1fF7_AqcNeT2M9iFTWu86TL0m&t=1s

"Qur'an and Yemen: Looking at the Quranic Verses related to Pre-Islamic South Arabia", Lecture 4
speaker: Dr. Farhad Ghoddoussi
Jun 1, 2025

#Quran_Pre_Islamic_South_Arabia

Session 4 (1/4):
In this fourth lecture of the Qur'an and Yemen lecture series, with the historical background which we acquired in the 3rd lecture we reexamined  the commentary of the Q85 Surah al-Buruj and the issue of the historical identity of Ashab al-Ukhdud (People of the Ditch) and discussed some of the questions and concerns which have been raised both in the western academic and the traditional Muslim scholarship.

We saw in lecture 2 that we have two general camps in regard to the interpretation of the verses Q85:4-9. One camp, which includes all of the traditional muslim commentators and the 19th and early 20th century, western scholars consider these verses refer to a persecution event in the historical past and the second camp which includes  nearly all of the western academic scholars in the last 100 years, with some notable exceptions, consider these verses refer to a punishment event in the eschatological future, metaphysical hereafter.

In the second lecture following Walid Saleh's arguments, we discussed what is wrong with the eschatological future metaphysical here after punishment interpretation of these verses.

In this lecture, we focused  more on obstacles or reasons, which has hindered the acceptance of the past historical persecution interpretation of these verses.

Muslim commentators, as early as first half of the 2nd century after Hijrah, for example in the works of Muqatil ibn Hayyan (d. C. 150AH/767AD)  identified at least 3 historical instances in which believers were persecuted by fire because of their beliefs: One in Najran in Yemen ( Yusuf Dhu Nuwas, 6th Century C.E.), One in Syria (Antiochus Epiphanes, 2nd century BCE, Selucid King Persecuting Jews) and  one in Babylon (Nebuchadnezzar, 6th century BCE, Book of Daniel 3). Early commentators were in agreement that verses Q85:4-9 refer to the one in Najran, Yemen.

Some traditional muslim commentators and western modern  scholars  from Abraham Geiger in 1833 till most recently Adam Silverman (2019) stated that these verses refer to the events described in the biblical book of Daniel chapter 3. But although this interpretation does not distort or twist the verses of Qur'an to fit its suggested interpreration as the eschatological interprerations do, but as it was discussed briefly in lecture 2 in the Daniel story the three believers were saved by the angel of God, while in Q85 they are martyred, therefore sense of the story in Daniel3 does not match Q85.

At the heart of the refusal to countenance a connection between Q. 85 and the Najrān  massacre is the historical argument that there is a discrepancy between the Qur’an and  the Syriac narratives in reporting the method or specfifics of the martyrs’ death. Specifically the issue of the ‘pit’(Ditch, Trench) and ‘fire’ mentioned in the Qur’an are made central in the denial of  a connection to the Najrān martyrdom narratives,  for examples Josef Horovitz in analysis  published in 1926 which would prove so influential that it would become the dominant narrative in  western academic study of this surah argues that since the narratives of the Martyrs of Najrān do not include the motif of trenches for fire, and the burning of believers is not emphasized in these narratives, then the Qur’an could not possibly be referring to this episode.

Walid Saleh states this is one of  the most bizarre of all the arguments that have been presented in the two-hundred-year history of Western scholarship on Q. 85, given that fire was central to the Syriac martyrdom narratives, (as  it is discussed in detail in his article and we briefly discussed in lecture 2 and this lecture ), not to mention the fact that they also featured a valley, which is not entirely conceptually unlike a ditch.

Session 4 (2/4):
Western Qur'an scholars seem to have wanted a complete historical correspondence between what the Qur’an states and the historical records and/or the hagiographers’ accounts of the massacre. Scholars who have claimed that Q. 85 presents an eschatological scene have used, supposed incongruities as central in arguing why the sura does not refer to the massacre. These scholars admit that the Syriac sources do mention the burning of believers, and accept the existence of such reports, but they would either claim that the manner of death by fire differs, or that fire was not central to the Syriac reports as it was in the Qur’anic narrative.

However, even the first Syriac text published by I. Guidi in 1881 mentions at least three instances of the burning of a church with priests inside, and it mentions a wādī (‘valley’) where people were slaughtered. The Syriac Chronicle known as Zachariah of Mitylene, which was published in 1899, includes a similar letter that mentions the episode of burning of a church and all who were in it. This apparently was not deemed sufficient evidence of correspondence, but soon new versions of the story would appear with more evidence that burning was progressively becoming a central theme of the Najrān martyrdom narrative.

The publication of the Book of the Himyarites, with its myriad references to fires and burned churches with priests inside is one such text. The Book of the Himyarites includes a horrendous scene, one among many, where persecutors fan the fire, and then hurl a woman into it to burn. Following the publication of such texts, one could no longer claim that fire was incidental to the Najrān narrative, yet somehow, this denial was sustained. It did not help that Axel Moberg himself, the editor of the Book of the Himyarites, adopted a dismissive tone when it came to Islamic narratives and joined the ranks of those who believed that Q. 85 has nothing to do with the Martyrs of Najrān.

Thus, the historical arguments that were made early in the debate have never been revisited, despite the fact that the available material on the massacre increased markedly after 1971, when researchers had access to the second letter of The Martyrs of Najrân. It seems that even this momentous publication by Irfan Shahîd did not seem to warrant revisiting the issue, although when in 2009 Thomas Sizgorich wrote on the Islamic legend of the Martyrs of Najrān in early Muslim historiography, hagiography, and Quranic exegesis, he did notice the similarity between the Qur’anic narrative and the Syriac sources, persecution by fire being central to both.

The claim that death by fire was not a prominent theme in the Najrān narratives is actually not accurate, and most probably, this assertion was only sustained because, as mentioned above, the editor of the Book of the Himyarites, Moberg, who was not a Qur’an specialist, was sceptical about the collective Arabic historical memory and favoured the eschatological reading of the text. He took the view that if there was a collective memory of the Najrān massacre, it had been preserved only in Syriac texts such as the Book of the Himyarites. Because of Moberg’s influence, one is willing to excuse the claim that burning by fire played only a marginal role in the Syriac reports by scholars who worked on the sura before 1971. However, as mentioned above, the publication by Irfan Shahîd of newly discovered documents in 1971 radically changed the picture and should have been the moment to reassess the debate about Q. 85. Yet this did not happen.

Session 4 (3/4):
Scholars who on the basis of supposed incongruences between the fire motif in the Qur’an and the Syriac martyrologies do not accept that Q85 is referring to the events in Najran have two wrong presumptions first treating Quran as a historical book that should report fully and accurately about the massacre and second judging the accuracy of Quranic narration on the basis of the Syriac documents and conveniently ignoring the fact that the Syriac documents themselves are hagiographic narratives and not pure historical.

For example David Cook in his article on the Islamic narratives of the Martyrs of Najrān states that ‘[c]omparison of the stories above with those of the historical Martyrs of Najrān does not reveal very many similarities’. First, it seems Cook is unaware of the hagiographic nature of what he terms the ‘historical’ narrative of Najrān, but then he is not a Syriac specialist. He proceeds to say that ‘[w]hile the theme of burning in the ukhdūd may overlap with the martyrological narratives, the burning is almost always associated with being burnt in houses or in churches’. As Walid Saleh puts it these scholars now can no longer claim that fire was incidental to the Syriac narrative and so, in order to counter the idea that the Qur’anic and Syriac narratives of martyrs of najran might be linked (both independent narratives of the same historical event), a new argument was added: that the burning was different in each case.

As it was said in the above, the similarities and connections between the Qur’anic narrative and the Najrān Syriac hagiographies are not hard to see, and it is surprising that it was not until 2009 that Thomas Sizgorich spotted the similarities between the two. Sizgorich’s work is a landmark study in which he pointed out the similarities between the texts, including the fire narratives and the story of the woman walking voluntarily into the fire. Moreover, he connected the wādī where the slaughter of the innocent took place in the Syriac narratives to the Qur’anic word ukhdūd. His article, however, went unnoticed.

Sizgorich was not primarily concerned with the original Qur’anic reference– that is, he was not attempting to determine whether the Qur’an was originally connected to the Najrān narrative– but he did recognise the connection between the Islamic narratives that appear in tafsīrs and the Syriac narratives. David Cook, in contrast, was summarily dismissive of the Islamic tradition in terms of a possible connection between the Qur’an or post-Qur’anic narratives and the Syriac narrative.

Similarities and differences in the Qur'anic and Syriac Documents narratives most probably and most easily can be explained as a reflection of the cultural memory of the two communities of the same historical event.

At about the same time, in 2010, David Taylor published his study of the Syriac martyr narratives of Najrān, and like Sizgorich has argued that these are hagiographic narratives and not historical first-hand reports. More importantly, his study of the document published by Irfan Shahîd is a turning point in the study of the Najrān narratives. Taylor notes that ‘this document has metamorphosed into a full-blown hagiographical work’.

Walid Saleh concludes that "the evidence, in my view, points to the Martyrs of Najrān" and he adds, "it is fascinating that Q. 85, this apparently unassuming sura, is one of the most written about in Western scholarship: the history of scholarship on it provides a window onto the history of Qur’anic studies in the Euro-American academy over the past two centuries".

We let W. Montgomery Watt, who was a meticulous and influential Western scholar, to summarize our discussion. He, in 1974, after examining the evidence in conclusion of a short article with the title ‘The Men of the Ukhdūd (Q. 85)’ wrote:

Session 4 (4/4):
"All these considerations seem to rule out the eschatological interpret ation and to support a historical one, more particularly the reference to the martyrs of Najrān. A reference to the companions of Daniel is not impossible, but the Arabian incident is more likely to have been known, even if only in a garbled version, to some people in Mecca in the early seventh century. It is worth remarking, however, that the point emphasised by the passage– the eventual punishment of those who persecute believers– remains valid whether there is a precise historical reference or not. The first hearers of the passage presumably thought that it referred to a particular event, but their tradition-based understanding of this event may have been inaccurate."

https://www.youtube.com/live/MNjjYgu5lEI

"A Brief Look to the Tawwabin Movement (The Penitents)"
speaker: Dr. Farhad Ghoddoussi
Jul 11, 2025

Abstract:
The Tawwabin (التوابين, "The Penitents") was a significant Shia movement that emerged in the aftermath of the Battle of Karbala in 680 CE, driven by collective guilt and the desire for atonement among the Shia supporters of Kufa who felt they had failed Hussein ibn Ali by not responding to his calls for support. This movement represented one of the earliest organized attempts to seek revenge for the martyrdom of Hussein ibn Ali, the grandson of Prophet Muhammad, and became a defining moment in early Shia history.

Dua Kumayl & Lecture, Muharram 2025, Dedicated to the Martyrdom Anniversary of Imam Ali ibn al-Hussain (p)

🌐 Hybrid, in English

Date
Thursday July 17th, 2025
6:45 pm to 9:30 pm (Eastern Time)

Location
MIT Tang Center, E51-395, 2 Amherst St, Cambridge, MA 02142

Schedule
6:45-6:55 Quran Recitation
6:55-7:30 Dua Kumayl
7:30-8:20 Lecture, in English, Dr. Farid Kaymaram
Title: “Ashura, Despair, and the Hope to Come”
8:20-8:30 Q&A
8:30-8:40 Ziyarat Amin Allah for Imam Ali ibn al-Hussain (p)
8:40-9:00 Prayer
9:00-9:30 Dinner

- About Speaker (Bio)

Zoom Participation (hybrid):
https://mit.zoom.us/j/95948516788

https://sites.mit.edu/zekrmit/
@zekrMIT

Abstract:
This talk explores the deep struggles of faith that many people face—feelings of despair, doubt, and the silence of God during times of pain and injustice. Using the story of Ashura and the sacrifice of Imam Hussain (alayhi al-salam) as a central example, Dr. Farid Kaymaram reflects on how personal and collective suffering can shape our search for meaning. He also speaks about the hope carried in the promise of the Mahdi (ajjal Allahu taʿala farajahu al-sharif), and how remembering Karbala can guide us through spiritual hardship. Rather than giving easy answers, this talk invites open and honest reflection on the challenges of faith in the modern world.