E. Krinis, "Galut and Ghayba: the exile of Israel and the occultation of the Shi'i Imam-Messiah. A...

The Institute of Asian and African StudiesThe Max Schloessinger Memorial Foundation

Offprint from

JERUSALEM STUDIES INARABIC AND ISLAM

40 (2013)

Ehud Krinis

Galut and Ghayba : the exile of Israel andthe occultation of the Shı↪ı Imam-Messiah.A comparative study of Judah Halevi and

early Imamı-Shı↪ı writers

THE HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEMTHE FACULTY OF HUMANITIES

CONTENTS

Joseph Witztum Ibn Ish. aq and the Pentateuch in Ara-bic

1

Bilha Moor Mosque and church: Arabic inscrip-tions at Shivta in the early Islamicperiod

73

Bethany Walker The Islamization of central Jordan inthe 7th–9th centuries: lessons learnedfrom H. isban

143

Christopher Melchert Whether to keep unbelievers out ofsacred zones: a survey of medievalIslamic law

177

Louise Marlow Difference and encyclopaedism intenth-century eastern Iran

195

Ehud Krinis Galut and Ghayba: the exile ofIsrael and the occultation of theShı↪ı Imam-Messiah. A compara-tive study of Judah Halevi and earlyImamı-Shı↪ı writers

245

Nimrod Luz Islam, culture and the “other”: thelandscape of religious (in)tolerancein Jerusalem 638–1517

301

Koby Yosef Ikhwa, Muwakhun and Khush-dashiyya in the Mamluk Sultanate

335

REVIEWS

Herbert Berg David S. Powers, Muh. ammad is notthe father of any of your men

363

Ewald Wagner A new highlight in Mehri studies:The structure of Mehri By JanetE.C. Watson

373

Mathieu Terrier Violences politiques, ecritures canon-iques et evolutions doctrinales en is-lam: des approches traditionnelles ala nouvelle approche critique de M.A.Amir-Moezzi

401

Heather Sharkey Andrew M. Sharp, Orthodox Chris-tians and Muslims in the postmodernage

429

Leigh Chipman Nidhal Guessoum. Islam’s Quantumquestion. Reconciling Muslim tradi-tion and modern science

435

JSAI 40 (2013)

GALUT AND GHAYBA: THE EXILE OF ISRAELAND THE OCCULTATION OF THE SHI↪I

IMAM-MESSIAH. A COMPARATIVE STUDY OFJUDAH HALEVI AND EARLY IMAMI-SHI↪I

WRITERS∗

Ehud KrinisBen Gurion University of the Negev

A. Introduction

At first glance, the Exile of Israel (galut), and the Occultation and con-cealment of the Imamı Shı↪ı messiah (ghayba)1 have little in common.Whereas the Exile of the Jews can be considered as a tangible and rec-ognizable reality, the disappearance and absence of the Twelfth Imam ofthe Imamı branch of the Shı↪a is a hidden phenomenon whose reality ispresent to the Shı↪ı faithful alone, and accepted only by them. Whereasthe Exile is a collective experience undergone by the Jewish people inits entirety, the Occultation of the Imam is individual, undergone onlyby the singular leader of the Shı↪ıs. And whereas the central impact ofthe Jewish Exile is arguably the severing of the connection between thenation and the territory it considers its homeland and national center,in the case of the Occultation of the Twelfth Imam, the severing is of thedirect and continuous connection between the Shı↪ı leader and his follow-ers. The Exile can be defined as an existential change of national context,the transformation from living within the framework of a national andreligious center to living within small and scattered communities that

∗Translated from Hebrew by Mrs. Batnadiv HaKarmi-Weinberg. Translationsfrom Judah Halevi’s Hebrew poetry are also by Batnadiv HaKarmi-Weinberg. TheEnglish translations from the Judeao-Arabic original of the Kuzari are taken from anew edition being prepared by Prof. Barry S. Kogan on the basis of the work of Prof.Lawrence V. Berman. I thank Prof. Etan Kohlberg and Prof. Meir M. Bar-Asher forreading a draft of this essay and for their helpful comments.

1An Arabic term which in this context combines and intertwines aspects of the dis-appearance, absence, and occultation of the Imam. Throughout this essay, I usuallyuse “Occultation” as a shorthand translation of the complex concept of ghayba.

245

246 Ehud Krinis

lack such cohesiveness. In contrast, the Occultation of the Imam, whiledepriving the Shı↪ıs of their leader, does not necessarily cause any factualchange in the formation of the community, or its geographic dispersion.

These significant differences notwithstanding, a broader view revealsa thread of commonality connecting the Jewish Exile and the Occultationof the Imam in mainstream Imamiyya: they are the most noticeable andprolonged phenomena in the history of their respective groups. In thecollective consciousness of these two congregations, there is an aberrantsituation, a violent break disrupting normative history, which is seenas a transitional period, lacking permanent reality. Yet for both, thisvery situation becomes the prevailing reality, casting its shadow on thegroup’s living conditions, tinting them with the distinctive hues thatprovide the group with a unique and separate identity that sets it apart.This is true both in regards to the group’s sense of its own identity, andin regards to the perceptions of surrounding peoples. When seen withinthis experiential context and its translation into theological principles,I believe there is room for a fruitful comparison between the Exile ofIsrael as a foundation-stone of Jewish identity on the one hand, and theOccultation of the Imam as the underpinning of Shı↪ı identity on theother.

This essay will therefore explore the Exile of Israel, and the Occul-tation of the Shı↪ı Imam, not as historical phenomena, but as theologicalones.2

2This is not to diminish the importance of the historic aspects of these phenomena.The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam can be considered historical, not only becauseof the contested question of whether the Eleventh Imam left any issue, but moreimportantly because of the historical dimension granted to the Occultation in Shı↪ıliterature. Examples for this include setting its commencement at the specific dateof 260/873–874; differentiating between two distinct periods within the Occultation— the initial stage (which later was titled the “Minor Occultation”) which ended in329/940–941, and the second phase (later entitled the “Major Occultation”), whichcontinues to this day. For more on the historical aspects of the Occultation of theImam in the Imamı branch of the Shı↪a, see A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism,pp. 82ff.; H. Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp. 75ff.; V. Klemm, “The FourSufara↩ of the Twelfth Imam”; S.A. Arjomand, “Imam Absconditus”; idem, “Thecrisis of the Imamate”; idem, “Gayba,” EIr, s.v. In this context, I have reservationsabout Gershom Scholem’s attempt to link between Christian and Imamı Shı↪ı mes-sianism as being based on “memories of a real person,” and his conclusion that “Jesusand the Hidden Imam, who once existed as persons, possess the unmistakable andunforgettable qualities of a person. This is what the Jewish image of Messiah, by itsnature, cannot have. . . ” (G. Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism, pp. 17–18).The figure of the messianic Imam, as it emerges from the Shı↪ı literature, is in itsessence mysterious and hidden: even initially, the Imam was never revealed to thepublic. Rather, he showed himself only to specific individuals, and to small groupsof devout believers. Thus, the description of the Hidden Imam in Shı↪ı literature ismainly typological, lacking the features of a known historical character. See in thiscontext: M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 423–427, 459–460.

Galut and ghayba 247

In particular, I will focus the discussion on a comparison between theconception of Exile offered by one of the great representatives of medievalJewish theology, and the idea of the Occultation of the Imam in thewritings of two well-known early Imamı Shı↪ı writers. The Jewish voicein this comparative study is that of Judah Halevi (al-Andalus c. 1080-Palestine 1141), the author of the theological-polemic “The Book of theRefutation and Proof on behalf of the Despised Religion” (Kitab al-raddwa-’l-dalıl fı al-dın al-dhalıl), better known as “The Book of the Kuzari”(al-Kitab al-Khazarı).3 Translated from Judaeo-Arabic into Hebrew ageneration after its completion, this treatise became immensely popularand influential among Jewish writers and readers; it remains so up tothe present day. It contains the authoritative theological statement ofone of the greatest and most original thinkers in the history of Jewishtheology, known also as the greatest Jewish poet of the Middle Ages.Representing the Imamı Shı↪a is Muh. ammad b. Ibrahım al-Nu↪manı,known as Ibn Abı Zaynab (d. circa 361/971), author of Kitab al-ghayba(“Book of the Occultation”), which revolves around the disappearance ofthe Imam. This is perhaps his only work to have survived.4 The secondShı↪ı voice is that of Muh.ammad b. ↪Alı b. Babuya (Babawayh[i]), knownas al-Shaykh al-s.aduq (d. 382/991), a prolific writer (though only a quitesmall percentage of his works have reached us) who dedicated his treatiseKamal al-dın wa-tamam al-ni ↪ma fı ithbat al-ghayba wa-kashf al-h. ayra(“Perfection of the religion and the completion of [God’s] favor by theattesting of occultation and the eliminating of confusion”) to the topicof the Occultation of the Imam.5

The decision to center the discussion on these three writers is notarbitrary. The twin ideas of Exile and the striving to be redeemed fromit are placed center stage in Judah Halevi’s poetry, and are withoutdoubt two of its key themes.6 The case of the Kuzari is more com-

3The Judaeo-Arabic text was first published in a version edited by HartwigHirschfeld (Leipzig, 1887), and then edited again by David Z. Baneth and HaggaiBen Shammai (Jerusalem, 1977). The citations throughout this essay refer to theBaneth-Ben Shammai edition, using Hirschfeld’s page and line numbering system,which was incorporated into the updated edition.

4For more on this author and his work, see M.M. Bar-Asher, Scripture and exe-gesis, pp. 63–64; A.J. Newman, “Between Qumm and the West,” pp. 95–96. Latersources attribute a short surviving commentary on the Qur↩an to al-Nu↪manı, butthis does not appear in the earlier lists of the author’s works.

5In some of the early editions, this treatise appears under a slightly different title:Ikmal al-dın wa-itmam al-ni ↪ma; see M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, p. 154,n. 100. For more on Ibn Babuya, see M.J. McDermott, “Ebn Babawayh,” EIr, s.v.;A.A.A. Fyzee, “Ibn Babawayh[i],” EI2, s.v.

6See A. Saenz-Badillos and D.J. Lasker, “Judah Halevi,” Encyclopaedia Judaica2,s.v.; J.H. Schirmann, The history of Hebrew poetry in Muslim Spain, pp. 448–449.According to Fritz Baer (F. Baer, Galut, p. 34), “No Jew before Judah Halevi ex-

248 Ehud Krinis

plex. On a quantitative level, the issue of Exile does not dominate thework, as only a few relatively short passages speak of it. However, on aqualitative level, Judah Halevi dedicates some of the most powerful andmoving passages of the dialogue to the discussion of Exile and the long-ing for redemption. I refer here specifically to the exchanges in KuzariI: 111–115; II: 22–24, 28–44; IV: 20–23, which demonstrate how burningand present the question of Exile was to the author.7 What is more,the appropriateness of the choice of Judah Halevi for this comparativestudy becomes evident in light of recent research exploring and detailingthe deep and wide-ranging links between Halevi’s theology and that ofearly Imamı Shı↪ı thinkers — of which al-Nu↪manı and Ibn Babuya aresignificant representatives.

I have devoted a study to expounding the relationship between theKuzari ’s modes of presenting the idea of the chosen people and early Shı↪ıtheological notions connected with the central doctrine of the Imam,common to both major branches of the Shı↪a, the Imamiyya and theIsma↪ıliyya.8 I maintain that there is a direct link between the wayHalevi establishes the position of the people of Israel as God’s ChosenPeople, and the manner in which early Shı↪ı literature institutes thespecial position of prophets and imams as the Chosen of God. Thefact that the category of God’s Chosen was formulated in early Shı↪ıliterature prior to Judah Halevi’s articulation of the idea brings us tothe main proposition of the study. Namely, that although the idea ofthe chosen people is indeed ancient and deeply rooted within Judaism,Halevi’s novel and systematic presentation of this central idea in theKuzari creatively draws upon terms, conceptions and themes borrowedfrom the Shı↪ı doctrine of the Imam as presented in Imamı and Isma↪ılıliterature.

In this study, by contrast, I do not argue for any direct influenceof Shı↪ı sources on Judah Halevi’s approach to exile and redemption.9

pressed his homesickness with so deep a bitterness and from so profound a historicalvision.”

7It is important to note here Judah Halevi’s official title of the book: “The Bookof the Refutation and Proof on Behalf of the Despised Religion.” This heading relatesto the condition of Judaism as a “despised religion,” i.e., to the condition within exile.See in this context the opinion of Fritz Baer (F. Bear, Galut, p. 31), where he arguesthat “Judah Halevi is the first thinker after the political decline of the Jewish nationto give a full theoretical consideration to the problem of the Galut.”

8E. Krinis, The idea of the chosen people (The English edition of this study isdue to be published in Brepols series “Cultural Encounters in Late Antiquity andthe Middle Ages [CELAMA]” under the title “God’s Chosen People: Judah Halevi’sKuzari and the Shı↪ı Imamı Doctrine.”

9Nevertheless, contemporary research into the Kuzari has uncovered evidence ofrelatively wide-ranging exposure to Shı↪ı ideas, leaving little doubt that Halevi wasaware of the central currents of Shı↪ı thought regarding the Occultation of the Imam.


Rather, I hope to sharpen and refine our understanding of various aspectsof the conception of the Exile of Israel and of the Occultation of theImam, recognizing them as seminal theological ideas in the thinking ofthese writers. This kind of clarity is best reached, I believe, by the kindof comparative study I offer here.10

In general, early Imamı Shı↪ı writing (eighth to eleventh century)falls into two main categories. The first is that of the scholastic writersinfluenced by the school of the Mu↪tazilı kalam, who follow to some de-gree the specific world view of this school. This approach is, at its base,universalist and rationalist. Writers of this school tend to adopt the lit-erary devices typical of the kalam: the use of dialectical argumentationin the form of questions and answers, with the author directly presentinghis or his group’s position, while engaging in a continuous debate withopposing opinions attributed to rival groups.11 The second category ofImamı Shı↪ı writing consists of adaptations of the broad spectrum oftraditional beliefs prevalent in the early Muslim world, adjusting themto point to the sectarian position of the Shı↪a as the chosen group, solebeneficiaries of God’s grace.12 Imamı Shı↪ı writers of this type adoptedthe literary devices of traditional Islamic writing. Their works are com-posed along the lines of the h. adıth genre, an oral tradition handed downby a chain of transmitters, linking the receiver of the tradition with itsultimate source — in the special case of Shı↪ı literature, this source is theProphet Muh.ammad, or one of the official Imams of the Imamı Shı↪a.This tradition tends to be written in a condensed, apodictic style, whichexpresses the absolute authority of its putative source — the Prophet orthe Imam. In the different genres based on the h. adıth form (collectionsthat sort oral tradition according to different criteria, general collections,commentaries on the Qur↩an, among others), the author is presented asmerely a compiler of divergent traditions. However, the role he plays isactually quite significant: not only does he choose which materials toinclude and the manner in which they will be organized and presented;

It is possible that this familiarity left its traces at various points in the Kuzari ’sdiscussion on the notion of Exile. See my comments on the subject throughout thisstudy.

10I do not presume to offer a definitive account of the Judah Halevi’s idea of Exile,much less of conceptions of the Occultation in Shı↪a theology. My aim is rather tobring to light certain elements by approaching them through a comparative prism. Itis important to note here that Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi makes a useful distinctionbetween the “collective-external dimension” and the “individual-internal dimension”in Imamı Shı↪ı eschatology. My inquiry here is generally focused in the so called“collective-external dimension.” See M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪iIslam, pp. 405ff.; idem, “Eschatology in Imamı Shı↪ism,” EIr, s.v.

11W. Madelung, “Imamism and Mu↪tazilite Theology,” pp. 12–29; M.J. Mcdermott,The theology of al-Shaıkh al-Mufıd ; Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp. 109ff.

12M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, pp. 13–19.

250 Ehud Krinis

he also frequently offers commentary on and emendations to existingtraditions.13

There is a fundamental divergence in the way the two main schoolsof Imamı Shı↪ı writers conceive of the Occultation of the Imam. Forthe traditional, h. adıth-based writers, the Occultation is conceived of asan overwhelming crisis; the scholastic school, by contrast, searches forall available means to present it as a direct, seamless continuation ofwhat came before, rather than as a disruptive breakdown.14 As willbe shown, the Exile is seen as a crisis and collapse throughout Halevi’swriting. Within this context, then, the relevant comparison is to writersof the Imamı Shı↪ı traditional school, and not the ones who representthe scholastic school. The works that I chose to represent the Shı↪ıtheological approach to the Occultation of the Imam — al-Nu↪manı’sKitab al-ghayba and Ibn Babuya’s Kamal al-dın — are therefore h. adıthcollections that express the ideas prevalent among the traditional sectionof the early Imamı Shı↪a.15 During the formative stage of the eighth to

13E. Kohlberg, “Shı↪ı h. adıth,” pp. 299–307; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide,pp. 19–22.

14This deep divergence between the conceptions of the Occultation as crisis in tradi-tional Imamı Shı↪ı literature, versus the harmonizing approach taken by the scholasticschool has yet to receive sufficient attention among modern scholars. In particular,the importance of the element of crisis in the conception of more traditional Shı↪ı cir-cles bears further consideration — and is therefore a subject to which I will dedicatemuch attention in this essay. Conversely, the elucidation of the Occultation among theImamı Shı↪ı scholastic theologians from the tenth century onward has already receivedconsiderable attention in modern scholarship. See M.J. Mcdermott, The theology ofal-Shaıkh al-Mufıd, pp. 126–132; A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, pp. 109–149;H. Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp. 125ff.; S.A. Arjomand, “The consolationof theology,” pp. 553ff.; idem, “Imam Absconditus,” pp. 7–10; idem, “The crisis ofthe Imamate,” pp. 121–124.

15For more on the Occultation of the Imam, as presented in the writing of thetraditional circles of the Imamı Shı↪ıs, see A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, pp.78–108 (this is an overview that bases itself mainly on the writings of al-T. usı, giv-ing less attention to the works of al-Nu↪manı and Ibn Babuya); A.A. Amir-Moezzi,The divine guide, pp. 99–123 (this overview focuses on the esoteric elements of theOccultation in these circles). In regards to the Kamal al-dın, it is important to notethat while the contents of the Shı↪ı h. adıth hold pride of place in this work, the au-thor precedes this section with several introductory chapters of his own, and otherauthors’ compositions (see Kamal al-dın, pp. 2–127). These passages are written inthe conventions of the scholastic school. See S.A. Arjomand, “The consolation oftheology,” pp. 554–559. In addition, Ibn Babuya weaves in several lengthy passagesfrom non-Shı↪ı sources citing tales of the longevity of certain personages throughouthistory (see ibid., pp. 552–683). For more on this subject, see S.M. Stern and S.Walzer, Three unknown Buddhist stories in an Arabic version. The amalgamation ofsources within Kamal al-dın is characteristic of the figure of Ibn Babuya himself, whowas the polymath of early Imamı Shı↪ı literature: he was a man of letters who hadstrong scholastic-theological tendencies, with propensities towards the belles lettresof the Arab adab yet who was simultaneously the last great representative of thetraditional school of Imamı Shı↪ism. See M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i


tenth centuries, this group was the most influential and creative of theearly Imamı Shı↪ı schools, and played a dominant role in the formationof the Imamı Shı↪a and its conceptual world.16

Al-Nu↪manı’s Kitab al-ghayba was composed in the middle of thetenth century, and precedes Ibn Babuya’s compilation by a decade ortwo.17 It is notable for its narrow focus, its theological depth, andfor the emotional intensity with which it imbues the Occultation of theImam: here is the most forceful and extreme expression of the idea ofthe Occultation as the definitive crisis of faith for the Shı↪ı believers. Forthese reasons, I believe that the significance of this work outweighs notonly that of Ibn Babuya’s, but also that of the most famous book onthis subject, the Kitab al-ghayba of Muh.ammad b. al-H. asan al-T. usı (d.460/1067), which was written about a century later.18

Ibn Babuya’s book, in counter-distinction, is notable for its breadthand comprehensiveness: it systematically sets out to tackle the Shı↪ıdoctrine of the Occultation from multiple directions, while attemptingto place it within a wide-sweeping historical perspective — a perspectivethat is almost absent from al-Nu↪manı’s work. Broadly speaking, we cansee these two works as complementary: Ibn Babuya’s all-embracing va-riety fills the gaps left by al-Nu↪manı’s presentation of the Occultation,

Islam, pp. 170 n. 2, 450.16H. Modarressi, “Rationalism and traditionalism in Shı↪ı jurisprudence,” pp. 151,

154; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, pp. 13–22.17According to al-Nu↪manı (Kitab al-ghayba, p. 157), the book was written a little

over eighty years after the occultation of the Imam, which gives us 340/951–952 asthe approximate year of composition. See H. Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, p.97, n. 234. For the approximate date of Ibn Babuya’s book, see ibid., pp. 97–98; A.A.Sachedina Islamic Messianism, p. 106. According to V. Klemm, “The four sufara↩

of the Twelfth Imam,” p. 138, n. 3, p. 152, Ibn Babuya completed his Kamal al-dıncirca 370/980.

18Al-T. usı’s contribution lies in merging the central currents of thought regardingthe Occultation of the Twelfth Imam, combining the arguments and explanationsof the scholastic trend in Imamı Shı↪ı writing with those of the traditional h. adıthschool. For more on this topic, see A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, pp. 72,81–82, 110, 149; S.A. Arjomand, “The consolation of theology,” pp. 564–568; idem,“Gayba,” EIr, s.v. However, as mentioned above, Ibn Babuya is a precursor to al-T. usı’s integrative approach. What is more, the section of al-T. usı’s work dedicatedto the traditional theological approach to the Occultation of the Imam is meagerand limited in comparison to what is found on this topic in the works of al-Nu↪manıand Ibn Babuya. Sachedina’s declaration that al-T. usı’s work includes all the mainpoints raised by the earlier writers of the traditional h. adıth school is, to say theleast, problematic, especially given Sachedina’s own awareness of al-T. usı’s selectiveapproach when choosing which traditions to include from among the works of hispredecessors he had available. See: A.A. Sachedina, ibid., p. 149. For more on themanner in which al-T. usı’s selective approach edited out much of what characterizedthe traditional view of the Occultation, see M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, pp.13, 17–18, 151, n. 80; S.A. Arjomand, “The consolation of theology,” pp. 565–566.

252 Ehud Krinis

while al-Nu↪manı’s focused depth helps delineate the aspects unique tothe Shı↪ı perspective — a distinction that is sometimes lost in the blur-ring and confusion that can result from Ibn Babuya’s various frames ofreference. Joined together, these two works are the earliest articulationof the concept of the Occultation of the Imam in Imamı Shı↪ı theologicalliterature, and are, I believe, sufficient for this study.19

Judah Halevi’s Kuzari is one of the most significant works of thegolden age of Judaeo-Arabic culture in al-Andalus of the eleventh andtwelfth centuries. Completed in 535/1140, this work transcends anyspecific school or tradition. One of the notable features of this extraor-dinary work is the creative and original way in which the author utilizesand reworks arguments and concepts stemming from the diverse rangeof Arabic culture in order to prove the superiority of his native Jewishculture to his Arabic “stepmother” culture — among other cultures.20

B. Primal affinity and historical severance

One of the interesting trends characterizing Judah Halevi’s thought inthe Kuzari is his insistence on a fundamental equivalence between theLand of Israel as the chosen Land, and the people of Israel as God’schosen nation. In section III: 73, the Rabbi (the Jewish interlocutorin the dialogue in the Kuzari) marks both the Land of Israel and thepeople of Israel (identified by him here as the “choicest” [s.afwa])21 andconsiders them as two of the set of givens that were set into the fabric ofcreation: they are fundamentals that predate history even though theyfind expression only in its course.22 Earlier in the dialogue, the sage

19For an overview of early Imamı literature dedicated to the issue of the ghayba,see M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, pp. 101–103; idem, “Eschatology in ImamıShı↪ism,” EIr, s.v.

20See my article “The Arabic background of the Kuzari.”21The term “choicest” (s.afwa) so central to the Kuzari, is a distinctly Shı↪ı term (see

on this topic Pines, “Shı↪ite terms and conceptions,” pp. 167–172; E. Krinis, The ideaof the chosen people,” pp. 60–64). Judah Ibn Tibbon, the twelfth-century translatorof the Kuzari, used the biblical term segula (“treasure”) for this Arabic word, andthe modern Judah Ibn Shmuel and Yosef Qafih. followed in his footsteps. However,a comparison with Halevi’s poetry reveals that for the author, the closest Hebrewequivalent for the Shı↪ı Arab s.afwa is mivh. ar (“best part”). See Shirei HaKodesh,vol. III, p. 793, column 106–107; vol. IV, p. 920, column 2.

22Kuzari III, 73: p. 222, ll. 14–23. The sage bases himself on the Talmudic andMidrashic discussions of the “seven things were created before the world” (thoughthe version he quotes differs slightly from the current known versions of these sources.See Pesah. im 54a, Nedarim 39a, Genesis Rabbah 1, 4). Following the language of themidrash, the Jewish Rabbi includes only Jerusalem, rather than the Land of Israel


points to the intrinsic connection between these two elements chosen byGod: the “choicest [part of humanity]” are inherently drawn to Israel,the choice locale. This fundamental linkage begins with the advent ofhistory, with Adam, the first of God’s chosen, and is bequeathed andpassed down along a dynastic-selective line of unique individuals, upuntil the generation of the sons of Jacob. At that point, the affinity be-comes generalized to all those who descend from Jacob-Israel.23 Haleviexplicates these consecutive stages of connection between the chosen ofGod and the chosen land — the early connection of individuals, andthe later collective link of the chosen nation — though two agriculturalmetaphors. In the first, he likens Abraham’s journey to Canaan to thereplanting of a fruit tree: just as a tree planted in desert soil might bebarren, but upon being replanted in the soil to which it is suited, willfulfill its purpose and bring forth fruit, so too Abraham was barren untilre-rooted in the chosen land.24 In the second, he likens the people ofIsrael to a vineyard perfectly suited to a specific mountainous region:just as choice grapes grow only in a terroir suited to them, so too thepeople of Israel can develop perfectly only in the land of Israel. This lastmetaphor emphasizes actions — most of God’s Laws can be executedonly in the land of Israel — as the essential link connecting the “choic-est” people of Israel (al-qawm alladhına hum al-s.afwa), which representsthe “the first uniqueness” (al-khus. us. iyya al-ula), with the Land of Is-rael, its complementary second uniqueness.25 In the closing of the book,Halevi extends this concept of specific adaptation and connection to in-clude the bond that exists between the “hidden Shekhinah” (al-sakınaal-khafiyya), which is potentially present within the being of all “native-born Israelites” (isra ↩ılı s.arıh. ),26 and the “visible Shekhinah”(al-sakınaal-z. ahira), which actualizes the potential of the “hidden Shekhinah”: thisactualization can take place only in the chosen land, with the fulfillmentof the commandments that can be completed only there.27

as a whole, within the list of elements whose uniqueness was established before time.However, it is clear from other parts in the Kuzari that for Halevi, the Land of Israelas a whole, and not only Jerusalem, is included within this set of primordial givens(see the continuation of my discussion in this section).

23Kuzari, I, 95: p. 44, ll. 11ff.; II, 14: p. 78 ll. 6 ff. and especially the descriptionof the land of Israel as “the soil most suitable for the choicest” (al-turba al-mushakilali-’l-s.afwa) in II, 50: pp. 110 li. 28–112, li. 4. For more on the Shı↪ı background tothis approach, see E. Krinis, The idea of the chosen people, pp. 47–53.

24Kuzari II, 14: p. 80, ll. 15–21. Compare: II, 16: p. 82, ll. 8–9.25Kuzari II, 12: p. 76, ll. 21–26; V, 23: p. 356, ll. 21–22. Compare: IV, 17: p. 260,

ll. 21–24.26See E. Krinis, The idea of the chosen people, pp. 88–89, 104, 106–107, 185–186,

209, 245–206, for more on the concept of the “native-born” (s.arıh. ) and its meaningwithin the Kuzari.

27Kuzari V, 23: p. 356, ll. 15–24.

254 Ehud Krinis

Conversely, the central texts of early Imamı Shı↪ı h. adıth literature,such as Us.ul al-kafı (The “Principles of Religion” [forming part of theBook of] Sufficiency) by Muh.ammad b. Ya↪qub al-Kulaynı (d. 329/941)dedicate much attention to describing the relationship between the cho-sen of God — the prophets and the imams — and the chosen com-munity of the Shı↪a, defining it as a correspondence that is rooted inpre-set givens. One of the factors contributing to this ingrained linkageis the primordial material of the primeval clay (t.ına) that was takenfrom beneath God’s Throne of Glory. The Shı↪a are the place (mawd. i ↪),associates (ahl), and standard-bearers (h. ammala) of God’s chosen lead-ers on the basis of the fact that they are formed of the same primordialmaterial from which the prophets and imams are formed — or at leastfrom a material very close to it in essence. According to this approach,the Shı↪ı faithful are intrinsically drawn to follow the imams becausethey are created from a common source.28 Another important factor isthe primal pact or vow (mıthaq) that bound all Shı↪ı faithful when theywere still microscopic specks (dharr) in Adam’s loins.29 The primal vowcombined with the material element of the primeval clay, together formthe pre-historical givens that define the essential affinity and correspon-dence between the imams and the Shı↪a community. According to ImamıShı↪ı thought, this pre-destiny is definitive: from the first, humanity isdivided and sorted into the camp of the Shı↪ı faithful and the camp oftheir enemies.30

There is a parallel between the Kuzari ’s conception of the primor-dial adaptation between the Israelites and the land of Israel on the onehand,31 and the corresponding idea of the Shı↪a community’s primeval

28Us.ul al-kafı, vol. 1, pp. 389, n. 2; 402, n. 5; 436–437, n. 2; 438, n. 9; vol. 2, pp. 2–6, nn. 1–6. See also U. Rubin, “Pre-existence and light,” p. 99; E. Kohlberg, “Imamand community,” pp. 31, 48; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp.153–158, 210–211.

29 Us.ul al-kafı , vol. 1, pp. 401, n. 3; 412, n. 4; 413, n. 4; 422–423, n. 53; 426, n. 74;436, n. 1; 438, n. 9; 451, n. 39. This approach resonates with the Shı↪ı explanationof the scene described in the Qur↩an, 7, 172. See on this matter: M.A. Amir-Moezzi,The divine guide, p. 34, 196, and n. 391; idem, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp.149–151, 257–258; M.M. Bar-Asher, Scripture and exegesis, pp. 132–136.

30See Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, 149 ff.; idem, “Cosmogony andcosmology: in Twelver Shi↪ism, ” EIr, s.v.

31Alexander (Simon Zvi) Altmann is the prominent representative of a large groupof scholars who believe that the concept of the uniqueness of the Land of Israel inthe Kuzari is based, first and foremost, on the theory of climes, which formed aninseparable part of the accepted scientific worldview of the ancient and medievalperiods. In a talk given at the conference in honor of Prof. Daniel J. Lasker’s sixtiethbirthday at Ben-Gurion University on March 30, 2009, I critiqued this well-knowntheory. In that talk (which I hope to publish in the near future), I attempted todemonstrate that the weight of the theory of climes in the shaping of the idea ofthe Land of Israel in the Kuzari is negligible. As far as Judah Halevi is concerned,


link to its leaders on the other.32 These analogous modes of thought setthe acute intensity and unique gravity associated with these two con-cepts into place, at a time of crisis are both transformed into a violentseparation.

Within the context of Shı↪ı writers who categorize the Occultationof the Imam as a fundamental severance, al-Nu↪manı’s contribution todelineating the theological approach to the Shı↪ı ghayba is particularlynoteworthy. Shı↪ı writers are united in differentiating between two dis-tinct periods in the Occultation. The first period extends from the deathof the Eleventh Imam, the Twelfth Imam’s father, in the year 260/873–874 CE, until the year 329/940–941. In this phase, there was still a con-nection between the imam-in-hiding and his followers, whether throughthe agency of various mediators — the most prominent and official ofthese are known as “representatives” (sufara↩) — or whether througha series of recorded appearances, where the Imam was made known, orshowed himself, to individual faithful or to a select audience. The sec-ond period commenced with the death of the Fourth Representative in329/940–941. In this phrase, the direct connection between the TwelfthImam and his community was broken, not to be resumed until the publicrevelation of the Imam as the Messiah at the end of days.33

Yet al-Nu↪manı gives this commonplace differentiation a unique twist,a new focus. Other writers, such as al-Nu↪manı’s contemporary, IbnBabuya, focus on the first period of the Occultation, dedicating consid-erable time to describing the institution of the “representatives” thatcharacterizes it — a tendency which is heightened in the case of thelater writer, al-T. usı. They discuss in detail the many testimonials to the

the reason for the uniqueness of the Land of Israel is the bond of specific adaptationdiscussed here, a bond that is unsuited to the principles of the accepted theory of theclimes of his day, and even contradicts it. In this context, see A. Altmann, “JudahHalevi’s Theory of Climates.”

32It is important to note that Judah Halevi’s approach does not have any of theclearly Gnostic elements that characterize the Imamı- Shı↪ı position on primal suit-ability, of which I have noted only a few. See on this matter E. Krinis, The idea ofthe chosen people, pp. 75–81, 115–121.

33See in this context the testament attributed to the fourth and final representative,which was said to have been publicized on the eve of his death in the name of themissing Imam. In this message, the Imam announces that the connection between himand his congregation has been torn asunder until the time of his messianic revelation:Kamal al-dın, p. 516, n. 44; al-T. usı, Kitab al-ghayba, p. 390: 364. Current studiesdealing with this period of Imamı Shı↪ı development paint a more complex picturein regards to the crystallization of the position of the “representatives,” and thegradual distinction between the two periods of the Occultation. See on this matter:E. Kohlberg, “From Imamiyya to Ithna-↪ashariyya,” pp. 521–534; H. Modarressi,Crisis and consolidation, p. 75 ff.; S.A. Arjomand, “Imam Absconditus,” pp. 1–12;idem, “The crisis of the Imamate,” p. 120 ff.; V. Klemm, “The four sufara↩ of theTwelfth Imam,” pp. 135–152.

256 Ehud Krinis

correspondence and meetings between the Twelfth Imam and his follow-ers, seeing it as a model for an Occultation that is based on connectionrather than severance.34 Al-Nu↪manı, by contrast, ignores the details ofthe first period of the Occultation, passing over it with a few generalizedstatements, and focuses instead on explaining the theological implica-tions of the Occultation-as-severance. This aspect, he observes, is mostclearly revealed and set into place in the second period of the Occulta-tion of the Imam. As evidenced by this interesting literary-ideologicalapproach, for al–Nu↪manı — the most profound early Shı↪ı theologiandealing with this topic — there is only one essential model of the Oc-cultation: that of severance between the Imam and his followers, withall the grievous implications this entails. Al-Nu↪manı does not deal withthe initial period of the Occultation, with its myriad events, because thisperiod is not defined by the essential fact of severance; it therefore is notincluded within the theological concept of the Occultation.35

In defining the Occultation as a concept based on the fact of ruptureand disconnection, al-Nu↪manı — as well as the (sometimes parallel)traditions compiled by Ibn Babuya — focus on the profound effect ofthe state of severance, which damages the primordial affinity between theImam and his followers. The effect runs in both directions. The Shı↪a,on their side, exist in a state of separation, cut off from the Imam, whoembodies for them — and for humanity as a whole — the link to divinegrace and goodness that enlivens the world and makes it fruitful, andwho is also their absolute religious authority. And on the other side, the

34Kamal al-dın, pp. 424–479, 482–523; al-T. usı, Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 229–327, 345–414. See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, p. 445 ff.

35See the fascinating analyses of this point that al-Nu↪manı weaves in through-out his text. He sharply differentiates between the initial period of the Occultation,which he sees as a continuation of the connection between the Imam and his follow-ers though the intermediary Representatives (of whom he speaks only in the mostgeneral of terms), and the second period, which for him is the true beginning of theOccultation in the sense of severance, a barrier separating the Imam from his follow-ers. The implications of this are what interest the author, and he chooses and sortsthe traditions he compiles according to these criteria. See Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 161,173–174, 193; as well as A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, pp. 85–86, 99–100;Newman, 2003, pp. 102, 103–104. In this context, it is especially noteworthy thatal-Nu↪manı chose to omit the traditions dealing with the early life of the TwelfthImam — material that was included in the great h. adıth work of his predecessor andteacher al-Kulaynı (See Us.ul al-kafı, vol. 1, pp. 328–332, 514–525). In contrast, al-Nu↪manı tends to include traditions that he inherited from his teacher when theyhelp define and establish the theological view of Occultation-as-severance. See Kitabal-ghayba, pp. 150, n. 7; 154, n. 11; 156, n. 17; 162, n. 2; 164, n. 4; 168, n. 9; 169, n.11, among many others. See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam,pp. 435–436. For more on the connection between al-Nu↪manı and al-Kulaynı, see H.Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp. 102–103, n. 259; A.J. Newman, “BetweenQumm and the West,” pp. 94–108.


isolated Imam, severed from his faithful, is sentenced to ineffectuality,unable to actualize the twin roles of mediator and guide that definehim.36

The Shı↪ı traditions define the Occultation as a state of severance,seeing it as a dual-leveled exile: the Imam is exiled from his community,and his community is exiled from him. The Imam-as-exile is describedas a wanderer, solitary and isolated, banished, fugitive, an alien andstranger, separated from his family, his father murdered, his blood yetto be redeemed, his son left alone (al-sharıd al-t.arıd al-farıd al-mufridmin ahlihi al-mutur bi-walidihi).37 The Shı↪a are defined in turn as acommunity that is left in a situation of “scattering and separation” (al-tafarruq wa-’l-tashattut)38 in the wake of the Occultation, a state inwhich the people are compared to a herd of goats or camels that haslost its way, frightened, lacking protection and honor, unable to findpasture and rest.39 Simultaneously, those faithful to the missing Imamare also described as the hidden righteous, endowed with the primalvirtues, living on the outskirts of society, hidden at the furthest reachesof the earth, aliens who wander from place to place, passing their life inobscurity.40

This view of the Occultation finds its climax in the presentation ofthe Imam as present-absent. In the early stages of the Shı↪ı conception ofthe Occultation, before it was adopted by the Imamı Shı↪a, the absenceof the Imam was considered a geographical fact: the missing Imam wasdescribed as hiding in an isolated location, physically distanced from hissupporters.41 However, as Imamı Shı↪ı literature adopted the idea of theOccultation, it deepened and intensified it, reconceiving the distance not

36For more detail on this matter, see the final section of this article.37Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 178–179, nn. 22–24; Kamal al-dın, pp. 303, n. 13; 318, n.

5; 361, n. 4 (with some variations). See also Bih. ar al-anwar, vol. 51, p. 37 forthe compiler Muh. ammad Baqir al-Majlisı’s commentary on the final clause of thistradition (I am grateful to Prof. Etan Kohlberg for directing me to this source).

38Kitab al-ghayba, p. 201 (subtitle of chapter 12).39Ibid., pp. 191–193, nn. 1–5; Kamal al-dın, pp. 303, nn. 14, 17–18.40 Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 203–204, n. 441S.A. Arjomand, “Gayba,” EIr, s.v. The concept of the Occultation of the Imam

was widespread among various Shı↪ı groups from the beginning of the eighth century.Those segments of the Shı↪a that adopted it at this early period were sometimesknown as the “Waqifiyya” i.e. “those who stand” — those who stopped the seamlesscontinuity of recognized imams by marking the last of the line as the imam in occul-tation. The sects from which the Imamiyya would eventually develop condemned theWaqifiyya approach, so long as it rejected one of the imams that they acknowledged.However, ultimately they adopted the idea, applying it to their Twelfth Imam. Aspart of this process, early Imamı writers (among them al-Kulaynı, al–Nu↪manı andIbn Babuya) appropriated and incorporated into their writings much material fromthe earlier Waqifı treatises dedicated to the subject of the Occultation. See M.A.Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, p. 437 ff.

258 Ehud Krinis

as geographical, but rather as existential, a spiritual state of alienation:the missing Imam is described as being physically present among his be-lievers, walking among their marketplaces, stepping on their carpets, yetforbidden to reveal himself to them — and they are unable to recognizehim.42

There is an internal logic at the basis of these descriptions of thetwo-pronged exile of the Imam on one side, and his Shı↪ı faithful on theother: a theology that believes that the loss of a direct perception of theprimordial link between the Imam and his followers will inevitably leadto such exilic alienation. Both the Imam and his followers are haplesslyswept up in an unavoidable chain reaction when the essential link tyingthem together is disrupted on the historical level. In the interim stageof severance, both sides are fated to a sterile exilic existence, from whichthey will be saved only by the final redemption, when the direct con-nection between the Imam and his community will be renewed, and theessential affinity connecting them will be revealed to all.43

This meta-historical logic, which revolves around the axis of affinity-severance, is also the internal logic that stands at the basis of JudahHalevi’s conception of Exile. Both in the Kuzari and in Halevi’s poetry,Exile is seen as a disruption of the two-sided connection linking the landof Israel and the people of Israel. On the one hand, the Exile is seen asdisconnecting the Israelites from their unique source of divine plenty,44

which is centered in the land of Israel and the divine laws that are depen-dent on it. And the Land of Israel, for its part, is rendered ineffective:the unique gifts that separate it from other lands can come to fruitiononly when the people of Israel as the choicest (al-s.afwa) among all na-tions dwell within it, fulfilling the laws relating to the Land, especiallythose revolving around the Temple.45 In the Kuzari, the description of

42Kamal al-dın, p. 341, n. 21 (an yakuna yasıru fı aswaqihim wa-yat.a↪u busut.ahumwa-hum la ya↪arifunahu); 236, n. 33; 350–351, n. 46, 49; 440, n. 7–8; Kitab al-ghayba,p. 164, n. 4 (yataraddadu baynahum wa-yamshı fı aswaqihim wa-yat.a↪u furushahumwa-la ya↪arifunahu h. atta ya↩dhana Allah lahu an yu↪arrifahum nafsahu); 175–176,n. 13–16. See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide, p. 115, 222, n. 624.

43This meta-historical vision sees history beginning at a point when the primordialorder of realty was completely valid and still intact. Nevertheless, the starting pointof history is also the point of departure from the primordial harmony. The unrollingof historical time begins an ongoing process, in which there is a growing discrepancybetween the meta-historical, true, level of reality, asserting the superiority of God’schosen, and the historical, surface, reality, which attests to their inferiority. Withinthis vision, the stage of the Exile and Occultation forms the climax of this process ofgrowing discrepancy between the meta-historical and the historical levels of reality.Redemption will bring about an inversion of the historical process, establishing theinitial harmony between the meta-historical and historical levels of reality.

44In the Kuzari, such “divine plenty” is usually indicated by the concept of “thedivine order” or “the divine affair” (al-amr al-ilahı).

45In my opinion, this is the context for understanding Halevi’s repeated call to


exile-as-severance focuses primarily on the people of Israel: the Jews inexile are in the condition of “scattering” and separation” (al-tafarruqwa-’l-tashattut)46 a state in which they are compared to severed limbs,disconnected from the whole, like Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones.47

This dismembered, disconnected state will not be redeemed and knitwhole until the Temple is rebuilt, and its service re-established. WithinExile, the people of Israel suffer all the afflictions that the prophet Isa-iah attributes to the “servant of God” in Isaiah 52-53: “despised andrejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief” (53:3) —that is, the figure of the righteous man rejected by society, the stooped,repellent form that other people avoid looking at, who hides himselfaway, distancing himself from them.48

Judah Halevi’s poetry takes a wider perspective than the Kuzariin describing Exile as a multi-layered, mutually-felt rupture, a severancebetween God and His people, and between God and His land. In this sev-erance, a clear parallel is drawn between the Land, which is described asemptied of all that characterized it in the past (Temple, priests, Levites,prophets, pilgrims, kingship, and wandering youth), and the exiled peo-ple, who are described as “high congregation / given over for eternity/ abandoned, abandoned / with weapons trained over them / and theirseed scattered / pressured and pressed / with lesions / and fresh wounds(ve↪ada hadura / zmitut mekhura / netusha, neh. usha / le-h. erev netuya/ ve-zar ↪am nephozim / leh. uzim, meh. uzim / betoldot nega↪im /u-makat.riya).49 Halevi goes on to describe the exiled Israel as uneasy, laid low,

treasure the stones of the Land of Israel and to cherish its soil, a motif that appearsin the Kuzari as well as in Halevi’s poetry and epistles. The recommended affectionshown by the Jews for the actual soil of the land they are coming to redeem is astarting point for renewing the internal linkage between the chosen people and thechosen land, as mandated by the vision of redemption. It indicates a sensual struggleto awaken the land from the deep slumber into which it fell when the people wereexiled. See Kuzari V, 27: p. 360, ll. 8–13; Shirim, 258, column 12; 261, column 5; 270column 25; J. Yahalom, “The immigration of Rabbi Judah Halevi,” p. 45, columns48–40 (an excerpt from Judah Halevi’s letter to the leader of the Egyptian Jews,Shemuel ben H. ananya). Halevi takes off from the biblical motif of cherishing stonesand soil, which originally related only to the Temple and Jerusalem (‘Zion’-Psalms102:14–15), and expands it to include the Land of Israel as a whole. For more onthe centrality of this motif in Halevi’s oeuvre, see R.P. Scheindlin, The song of thedistant dove, pp. 159–160, 169, 179, 212, 250–251.

46Ibid., II, 32:p. 102, ll. 1–2; III, 11: 160, l. 20 (t.ul al-galut wa-tashattut al-milla).See Shirei HaKodesh, vol. 1, p. 159, column. 5: “One nation condemned — scatteredand separated” (↪am eh. ad nigzar-meforad u-mefuzar).

47Kuzari II, 30: p. 100, ll. 11–12; III, 11: p. 160, ll. 24–25.48Ibid., II, 34: p. 102, ll. 19–23. See Shirim, p. 212, column 2–4; Shirei HaKodesh,

vol. III, pp. 700, columns 8–12; 705, columns 1–5.49 Shirim, p. 224, columns 1–2, 9; 235, columns 20–21 (with the complete poem);

Shirei HaKodesh, vol. II, pp. 509, columns 1–2; 512, column 6; vol. III, pp. 648,

260 Ehud Krinis

exploited, poor, pitiable, hunted and hounded, wanderers compared toscattered sheep that are lost with neither pasture nor shepherd, left tothe care of those who prey upon them.50 But more than this, in Halevi’spoetry — and to a lesser extent, in the Kuzari — the Jews becomepresent-absent : they lack historic presence, whether in comparison totheir own glorious past, or to the active and powerful nations amongwhom they presently dwell. They are a nation helpless and hopeless,a people that in their present state are no longer capable of birthing a“high and glorious man” (enosh nehedar ve-h. ashuv), and are in dangerof having their past wiped out and their memory fade.51 This charac-terization of Israel-in-exile as present-absent reaches its climax in theKuzari ’s “parable of the seed,” in which their existence is compared tothat of a seed that has fallen to the ground and become buried in the soil,unfelt and unseen so long as it continues its subterranean incubation.52

For Halevi, the primal connection between the land and people ofIsrael — an affiliation that found its perfect expression in their earlymutual development53 — becomes in the period of exile a negative af-filiation: the downtrodden state of the abandoned Israelites, persecutedby their enemies, reflects, in Halevi’s poetry, the destroyed state of de-serted Jerusalem and the captive land of Israel, given over to oppressive“tyrants” (↪arizim).54 Such a destructive linkage, the consequence ofsevering the direct connection between the nation and its land, actuallypoints in the negative to the power of the primordial bond: there is aprimal equation linking these two “choice” variables. When positive,

columns 5–7; 705, columns 1–5.50Shirim, pp. 195 columns 18–23; 197, columns 3–4; 216, columns 5–7; 225, columns

20–21; Shirei HaKodesh, vol. I, pp. 12, column 8; 37, column 3; 49, column 6; 127column 15; 159 column 4; 172 column 13; 210, columns 14–15; 224, columns 3–5; 249column 5; 251, column 13; 253, column 16; vol. II, pp. 322, column 3; 447, column 3;536, column 30; 544, columns 20–21; vol. III, pp. 646, column 13; 659, columns 2–3;661, column 1; 875, column 14. The use of the term t.rudim (Shirim, p. 204, column19) in describing the people of Israel as ones who suffer from expulsion and exile isof particular interest in this context: here the meaning of the Hebrew word t.rudimconverges with the Arabic word t.arıd — a term which appears repeatedly in parallelShı↪ı descriptions of the state of expulsion of the absent Imam.

51Shirim, pp. 189–190, columns 20–21; Shirei HaKodesh, vol. 1, p. 1, columns 7–9;vol. II, pp. 522, column 4; 525, column 2; vol. III, pp. 703, columns 3–4; 822, columns11–12. Kuzari II, 64: p. 122, ll. 16–17 (wa-hiya ghayr mah. susa bayna al-umam li-qillatiha wa-dhillatiha wa-tashattutiha); III, 11: p. 160, ll. 24–25; IV, 23: p. 264, l.26 (wa-laysa yabqı laha athar mah. sus ↪ala ma yaz.unnu al-nas. ir ilayha). See also I.Levin, Jackals and violin, pp. 136–138.

52Kuzari IV, 23: pp. 264, l. 24–266, l. 1.53Note how the Jewish Rabbi emphasizes that every biblical threat or promise

connected to the unique relationship between the land and people of Israel has alreadyfound fulfillment in the course of Jewish history, in the reality of the First Templeera and the period immediately preceding it. See Kuzari I, 109: p. 58 ll. 1–18.

54Shirei HaKodesh, vol. II, p. 522, columns 11–12; vol. III, p. 836, columns 6–11.


the connection between these two perfectly suited elements allows theflowering of their unique gifts as Chosen People and Promised Land, butwhen negative, the severance between them causes parallel expressionsof destruction. In both cases, the power of the relationship remains thesame.

In our comparative context, we can sum up by noting that in regardto the positive elements of the primal affiliation, the extreme expres-sion of this idea in Imamı Shı↪ı literature can help clarify what Halevimeans when he speaks of a primordial relationship. And conversely,when speaking of the negative side of the equation, of the adverse effectsof disjoining, Judah Halevi’s stunning, heartrending descriptions help usunderstand the parallels that are drawn between the state of the absentImam as persecuted exile,55 and the wretchedness of his faithful follow-ers in Imamı Shı↪ı literature: it is the reverse consequence of the primalaffiliation binding the two together.

C. The Messianic-teleological explanation

There are two ways of approaching an understanding of significant long-term historic phenomena, such as Exile (in the case of the Jews), or theOccultation (in the case of the Imamı Shı↪a). The first is to look atthe roots of the phenomena, to see it as a logical consequence of whatpreceded it; the second is to view it from a teleological perspective, tosee it as always driving towards its ultimate outcome, with this outcomegranting significance to every step along the way. In the case of thisstudy, which focuses on the theological implications of the Jewish Exileon the one hand, and of the Occultation of the Imam on the other, thetraumatic historical phenomena are explained differently depending onthe historical prism from which they are perceived. When seen from the

55Imamı Shı↪ı literature describes the persecution of the absent Imam as a kind ofpsychological pressure, whereby he experiences a continual state of paralyzing terror,a conviction that his enemies are hunting him down. This is presented as one of thecentral reasons that the Imam went into hiding. See Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 176–177,n. 18–21; Kamal al-dın, pp. 342, n. 24; 481, n. 7–10. See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi,The divine guide, p. 114,and 221 n. 612. The Imam’s terror clearly contradicts oneof the central Shı↪ı dogmas, accepted by all Imamı Shı↪ı writers, which guaranteesthe Imam’s continued life in all circumstances: the Imam cannot die, because hisexistence as “God’s proof” (h. ujjat Allah) is mandatory (see the discussion in the finalsection of this study). This tension suggests that the Imam’s terror, as presented byImamı Shı↪ı tradition, must be seen as something that is imposed from above, whichcannot be explained on a rational level (a kind of explanation sought after by somerepresentatives of the Scholastic school. See in this context A.A. Sachedina, IslamicMessianism, pp. 103–104).

262 Ehud Krinis

perspective of historical roots and precedence, the debate tends towardsapologetics and theodicy; Exile or Occultation are seen as a punishment,a consequence of the people’s present or past sin. In contrast, whenviewed from a teleological perspective, the debate tends towards a focuson eschatological and messianic elements. Exile and the Occultation areseen as introductory phenomena that will lead to and define the futureredemption — a redemption that will come as their final culminationand end.56 These two approaches are not mutually exclusive, and theycan exist side by side within the overall theological debate — indeed,the theological discussion of such central topics tends to be wide-rangingand inclusive. Nonetheless, when dealing with specific cases of particularwriters or streams, one can note a tendency to favor one approach overthe other.

In the case of early Imamı Shı↪ı literature, there is a distinct incli-nation to highlight the teleological approach: the Occultation is givenits meaning through its future denouement, when the hidden Imam, amessianic figure who will redeem his Shı↪ı community and the world asa whole, will be revealed. A clear indication of this focus can be foundin al-Nu↪manı’s work: though its title declares that it is dedicated toelucidating the Occultation, it spends as much space — if not more— describing the future reappearance and messianic mission of the ab-sent Imam.57 More substantively, it is rare for either al-Nu↪manı orIbn Babuya to relate to the Occultation as a punishment for the sinfulbehavior of the Shı↪ı faithful.58 What is more, Ibn Babuya, the Shı↪ıwriter with the clearest tendency to view the Occultation within a widerhistoriographical context, actually compares it to the enslavement of theIsraelites — whom he identifies as the Shı↪a of that time — in Egypt: theenslavement was a period of Occultation (ghayba), in which the Israelite-Shı↪ı faithful awaited the return and revelation of the savior (al-qa↩im);a hope fulfilled when Moses appeared to them after his period of hid-ing/occultation in Midian.59 These are but a few examples to which we

56For more on this differentiation, see H.H. Ben-Sasson, “Galut,” p. 130.57The overall composition of al-Nu↪manı’s Kitab al-ghayba can be summed up thus:

chapters 1–9 (pp. 33–140) are an introductory exposition; chapters 10–12, whichstand at the center (pp. 140–212), deal with the Occultation itself; chapters 13–23,as well as the closing chapter 26 (pp. 212–324; 331–332) deal with different aspectsof the reappearance of the Imam, and his messianic mission of redemption. IbnBabuya’s work is less tightly structured than al-Nu↪manı ’s, and the composition ismore complex.

58Kitab al-ghayba, p. 145. See also in this context: ibid., pp. 292–293, n. 8, 10 (theattempt of the Shı↪ı faithful to hasten the return of the Imam, and the idea that ifthe date of the reappearance were to be publically revealed, the redemption would bedelayed). We must differentiate between relating to the Occultation as a punishment,versus seeing it as a test — a matter which I will discuss in the next section.

59Kamal al-dın, pp. 145–146, n. 12. See also: ibid., p. 158, n. 17 for an identification


could add countless others, pointing to the inextricable bond tying theShı↪ı conception of the Occultation to a messianic perspective of redemp-tion. For the early Shı↪ı writers, it is impossible to explicate or describethe Occultation and absence of the Twelfth Imam without also relatingto his return as the Qa↩im and his coming redemption of his communityand of the world.

It is important to acknowledge that there is a profound differencebetween Judah Halevi’s task when attempting to explicate the JewishExile, and that of the early Shı↪ı writers when dealing with the Occulta-tion. The Shı↪ı writers were responding to a relatively recent historicalphenomenon in the development of their sect, setting into place the ele-ments that would consolidate the conceptual approach to it; the Jewishauthor, by contrast, was responding to an ancient event with long-lastingimpact on the existence and consciousness of his people. He writes inthe context of a long and rich tradition explicating Exile. This tradition,especially at its foundational biblical level — but in later stages as well— is characterized by an emphasis on apologetics and theodicy: Exileis explained as a divine punishment mandated by the grave sins of thepeople, an expression of God’s just ways in dealing with his rebelliousnation.60

When we consider this cultural context, it is not surprising thatHalevi gives greater weight to theodicy’s apologetic perspective on Ex-ile than do the Shı↪ı writers. Nonetheless, in most places where theKuzari raises the apologetic-theodicic approach, it completes the dis-cussion by referring to the future redemption. The ultimate end adds anew perspective, retroactively redefining Exile while granting it inherentmeaning, giving comfort and hope to the exiled Jew.61 A close readingof Halevi’s poetry reinforces the impression left by the Kuzari : for thiswriter, Exile is inextricably bound to redemption, which is its direct andunavoidable denouement.62

of the interim period between the days of Ezra and those of John the Baptist, heraldof Jesus Christ, as a second period of Occultation (ghayba) for the Israelites. SeeIthbat al-was.iyya, pp. 54–60. For more on the identification of the biblical Israeliteswith the Shı↪a in early Shı↪ı literature, see M.M. Bar-Asher, “On Judaism and theJews in early Shı↪ı religious literature,” pp. 18, 26–30, 34.

60See H.H. Ben-Sasson, “Galut,” pp. 117–121; Y.A. Zeligman, “Galut,” Encyclo-pedia Biblica, s.v.

61Kuzari II, 35: p. 102, ll. 24–26; II, 44: pp. 104, l. 21–106, l. 4 and compare toibid., p. 106, ll. 4–8. See also III, 11: p. 160, ll. 19–22 and compare to III, 11–12: pp.160, l. 23–162, l. 3; IV, 23: p. 264, ll. 18–23 and compare to ibid., pp. 264, l. 23–266,l. 8; V, 27: p. 360, l. 6–8, and compare to ibid., ll. 8–13.

62In Halevi’s poetry, a linkage between the motif of Exile and that of Redemption isquite common; the juxtaposition of Exile with themes of punishment and reparationor atonement for the nation’s past sins are not. See Shirei HaKodesh, vol. II, pp.534–540; vol. III, p. 701, columns 12–15; Shirim, pp. 320–321.

264 Ehud Krinis

There is a clear linguistic marker pointing to the early Shı↪ı writersand Judah Halevi’s shared focus on future horizons and on redemption:the frequent use of the Arabic word al-muntaz.ar (awaited, hoped for).This word indicates an intrinsic connection between the present (thestate of the Occultation of the Imam, and the Jewish Exile, respectively)and the future. The connection is founded on the chosen community’seager anticipation of redemption from its present downtrodden state— a redemption expressed in the reappearance of the Imam for theShı↪a, and in the return of the people to their land for the Jews. Thereiteration of the term al-muntaz.ar reveals that these writers had adouble consciousness, a split-experience of the present: it is both a stateof absence and disconnection, yet simultaneously it is also bathed inanticipation of the messianic future that will offer a resolution of thisvery situation.

In Shı↪ı literature, al-muntaz.ar is often used in conjunction withthe accepted appellations for the absent Twelfth Imam.63 The mes-sianic Imam is al-muntaz.ar, while his faithful followers are al-muntaz. irunli-z.uhurihi (“those who await his appearance”);64 redemption itself iscalled al-amr al-muntaz.ar (“the awaited event”).65 The commandmentto await the coming of the Imam is incumbent on the Shı↪ı faithful. Thisrequirement becomes more relevant and demanding the longer the Imamis missing — a delay that reinforces two contradictory tendencies: thefirst is despair, a loss of belief in the appearance of the Imam; the sec-ond is impatience, an attempt to force the Imam’s hand. Both thesetendencies stand in contradistinction to the values embodied in the idealof Shı↪ı intiz. ar (expectation, anticipation).66

If we turn to the Kuzari, we see that in two of the (relatively few)places where Halevi discusses the figure of the Messiah, he refers to him

63Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 140 (chapter title), 169 (al-imam al-muntaz.ar); 331, n. 6;Kamal al-dın, pp. 228, n. 7; 334–335, n. 4–5; 357, n. 54; 372–373, n. 6. In early Shı↪ıliterature as a whole, and particularly in the works of al-Nu↪manı and Ibn Babuya,the term al-qa↩im — with its distinctly Shı↪ı undertone — is the most commonlyused appellation for the messianic figure of the absent Imam. In al-T. usı’s later work,by contrast, there is a clear tendency to use the term al-mahdı, which has generalIslamic undertones, as an appellation for the Imamı Shı↪ı messiah. See especiallyal-T. usı, Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 175–189. For more on this topic, see A.A. Sachedina,Islamic Messianism, pp. 60–64, 68–70; H. Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp.87–91; S.A. Arjomand, “Imam Absconditus,” p. 10. Sachedina’s claim (p. 51) thatthe appellation al-muntaz.ar is widespread in Shı↪ı literature because of its use bythe important Shı↪ı scholar al-Shaykh al-Mufıd (d. 1022), is, in my opinion, ratherstrange and completely unfounded.

64 Kamal al-dın, p. 357, n. 54.65Kitab al-ghayba, p. 200, n. 15 (hadha al-amr muntaz.aran).66Kamal al-dın, p. 378, n. 3 (the final section), as well as p. 377, n. 1; Kitab

al-ghayba, p. 200, n. 16.


as al-mashi ↩ah. al-muntaz.ar (the awaited messiah).67 What is more, heuses the appellation al-muntaz.ar twice in a row in a discussion highlyrelevant to our topic: the Jewish sage’s exposition on the close connec-tion between the appropriate pietistic approach to surviving exile, andthe coming of the period of redemption and of the generation that willexperience the messiah.68 In yet another instance, the sage speaks of themidrashic and Talmudic dictums regarding the messianic era, the resur-rection of the dead, and the World to Come as “the longed-for news.”(al-akhbar al-muntaz.ara)69

We find, therefore, that in the writings of Judah Halevi, as in thoseof the early Shı↪ı writers, the Exile of Israel and the Occultation of theImam are respectively described as internal states of mind, focused onthe future with its promised redemption rather than the past with itslessons. Exile and the Occultation are conceived as periods in whichthe faithful are commanded to live in expectation and longing, awaitingredemption, showing steadfast belief in the face of the ever-lengtheningstate of loss and severance.

D. A test of faith

The concept of a test of faith or trial is a central, rich, and multifacetedcomponent in the exegetic approaches to the Occultation in early ImamıShı↪ı writing, and to Exile in the writings of Judah Halevi. In the caseof early Shı↪ı writing, al-Nu↪manı’s influence dominates, and is centralto shaping the theological approach to the Occultation of the Imam as atest of faith for the Shı↪ı believers, but Ibn Babuya’s contribution is notto be discounted. He too has a place in developing this central themein the writings dedicated to the Occultation. The conceptualizations ofthe Occultation and of Exile as a test are complex and multilayered, andtherefore must be analyzed from several perspectives.

In Shı↪ı literature, the Occultation of the Imam is perceived as a pe-riod of process that reaches resolution only with the appearance of the

67 Kuzari III, 55: p. 210, l. 13; IV, 23: p. 266, l. 5 (li-’l-mashiah. al-muntaz.ar). Seein this context the use of the predominantly Shı↪ı expression al-qa↩im al-muntaz.ar ina Judeo-Arabic fragment attributed to Judah Halevi’s associate, Moses b. Ezra, pub-lished by Wilhelm Bacher: “ein unbekanntes Werk Moses Ibn Esras,” Monatsschriftfur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 51 (1907): 348, l. 8.

68Ibid., I, 115: p. 62, ll. 25–27 (wa-law h. amalna hadha al-jala↩ wa-’l-bala↩ fı dhatAllah ↪ala ma yajibu la-kunna fakhran li-’l-jıl al-muntaz.ar ma↪a al-masıh. fa-kunnanuqarribu al-ajal li-’l-furqan al-muntaz.ar).

69Ibid., V, 14: 326, ll. 1–4.

266 Ehud Krinis

Imam; it is fundamentally a trial and a test (mih. na, imtih. an, tamh. ıs. ,ibtila↩, fitna) in that the process is one of selection, of separating thewheat from the chaff. Over the extended period of the absence of theImam, the choice few are winnowed out from among the ignorant, op-portunistic, hypocritical, or confused masses. This is a selection processthat takes place within the Shı↪ı community itself.70

Historically, the formation and development of the Imamı Shı↪a, asdescribed by Shı↪ı writers and corroborated by the reports of rival camps,was a process of fractionalization, an ongoing splintering of the Shı↪ıcamp.71 Within this context, the historical occurrence leading to theOccultation — i.e. the death of the Eleventh Imam in the year 260/873-874, without publicly designating an heir apparent — led to a seriouscrisis, catalyzing further schisms and infighting among his supporters.72

One group from among the many that surfaced following this crisis wouldbecome the nucleus of the Imamı Shı↪ı faction, ultimately known asTwelver Shı↪ısm (al-Ithna ↪Ashariyya).73 They formed their unique iden-tity around the belief in the Occultation of the Imam: the belief thatthe Eleventh Imam had left behind a son whom he had designated ashis heir, but who had gone into hiding until circumstances would allowhim to reveal himself and openly return to his position. The years-longprolongation of the absence of the Twelfth Imam — beyond what wasinitially expected by his followers,74 and ultimately beyond a normalhuman lifespan — caused an upsurge of doubt and questioning amongmany of those who had adopted belief in the Occultation. The ongoingstate of crisis, uncertainty, doubt, and mass-desertion of those who hadbelieved in the Occultation became known among the Imamı Shı↪ı writ-ers of the time as the “confusion” (h. ayra). It was at this point in time,when the bewilderment, disorientation and panic among the followersof the Twelfth Imam was drawing to a head, that al-Nu↪manı and IbnBabuya enter the picture: as mentioned before, both wrote their workswithin 80-100 years from the beginning of the Occultation.

These writers turned to the motif of the test of faith, to the idea ofa selection process, as a way of explaining their current historic predica-ment, the fractionalization of the Shı↪ı camp as a whole, and the help-

70See especially the introductory words of al-Nu↪manı in his Kitab al-ghayba, pp.20–28, as well as M.A. Amir-Moezzi, “Eschatology in Imamı Shı↪ism,” EIr, s.v.

71For a useful overview of this subject, see M. Momen, An introduction to Shı ↪ıIslam, pp. 45–60. See also M.G.S. Hodgson, “How did the early Shi↪a become sectar-ian?,” pp. 1–13; Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, p. 53 ff.

72M. Momen, An introduction to Shı ↪ı Islam, pp. 59–60; A.A. Sachedina, IslamicMessianism, pp. 42–56.

73See in this context E. Kohlberg, “From Imamiyya to Ithna-↪ashariyya;” idem,“Early attestations of the term Ithna-↪ashariyya.”

74H. Modarressi, Crisis and consolidation, pp. 95–96, 101–102.


lessness and despair spreading through the faction that supported themissing Imam in particular. They reframed these negative, discourag-ing trends, which might have been taken as a sign that the Shı↪a hadlost their way: when seen as a test of faith, they became instead essen-tial steps on the way to redemption. In the works of al-Nu↪manı andIbn Babuya, the lengthening of the Occultation is discussed as a nec-essary development: it is a purification process that helps differentiatethe authentic faithful from the dross of many false believers. The Oc-cultation is reconceived as a period of “dark and blinding trial” (fitna↪amya↩ h. indis), in which the Shı↪a are victimized, butchered, beheaded,murdered and incinerated, their blood spilled like water, while they andtheir wives live in constant fear — a horrifying existence of (largelyimagined) persecutions that only the “true faithful” (awliya↩ h. aqqan)can survive with their faith intact.75 The trial embodied by the Occul-tation extends beyond the physical into the spiritual: it is a period ofdarkness, blindness and depression (fitan muz. lima ↪amya↩ munkashifa)in which the enemies of the Shı↪a continue to rise, their power spread-ing, and along with them evil, injustice, destruction.76 It is a period inwhich the Shı↪ı faithful are mocked and humiliated by their opponents,in which they cry and mourn and drown in a sea of doubt as they waitin vain for any sign from their Imam.77 All this and more come togetherto form a picture in which the prolongation of the Occultation acts as afilter that separates between the great majority that cannot withstandthe test and who fail the trial, and those precious few, the true faith-ful, who can endure and survive whatever happens to them during thisdifficult, seemingly endless period.78 The internal schisms that charac-terized the development of Shı↪ism from its inception and throughoutits history, gaining force during the period of the Occultation, are nowseen as a quasi-evolutionary process of selection among the rank and fileof the Shı↪a, in which only those whose faith and faithfulness can resistany hardship survive, while the rest, who lack inner strength, fall by thewayside.79

For the Shı↪ı writers, this conception converges with the Gnostic ideaof primordial givens mentioned earlier, which also characterized early

75Kitab al-ghayba, p. 66. n. 5; Kamal al-dın.76Ibid., pp. 141–142, n. 2.77Ibid., pp. 142–145, n. 3, 152–153, n. 10; Kamal al-dın, p. 347, n. 35.78Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 153–154, n. 10–11; 159, n. 4; 161–162, n. 1–2; 183–184;

Kamal al-dın, pp. 288, n. 7; 352, n. 49; 360, n. 1.79See Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 206–211, n. 12–18. To explain this process, al-Nu↪manı

turns to a parable of wheat that has been stored for a long time and been graduallydecimated by worms. The owner sifts it again and again, until all that is left isthe small remnant that is completely resistant to worms (ibid., p. 26). See M.A.Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 291–293, 416–417.

268 Ehud Krinis

Imamı Shı↪a thought. The many who fall by the wayside during thelengthy trial-period of the Occultation are those whose primordial ma-terial (t.ına) was originally faulty or corrupt;80 those few who withstandthe test are the faithful whose position was already ratified in the originalpact (mıthaq).81 In this deterministic perspective, the ongoing realityof the absence of the Imam is meant to bring to a close the processbegun in primordial times, to reveal within history the small kernel ofupright Shı↪a, the authentic followers of the Imam, while exposing thevast majority of those who have joined the opposing, treacherous camp— a division set into place before the advent of history, dictated by theoriginal primeval givens.82

The motif of Exile as a test of faith for Israel — both on a personaland national level — is an integral part of Judah Halevi’s conception ofExile as well. What is more, the aspect of selection so central to the earlyImamı Shı↪ı conception of the Occultation — the idea of winnowing thegrain from the chaff, of smelting the metal from the dross — is mentionedin several places as the explanation for Exile and its hardships.83

There is an additional emblematic Shı↪ı emphasis that finds a paral-lel in the Kuzari I, 115: the idea that the ability to bear the ongoingadversity and humiliation with patience and submission is a test of faiththat only a few of the faithful can truly withstand, while the rest fail.84

Yet it is here that we also find a fundamental divergence in the ap-proaches. The early Shı↪ı writers are characterized by a censuring, sec-tarian tone that finds the vast majority of Shı↪a guilty: as those whohave failed the trial of faith presented by the Occultation, they are nolonger part of the community of the faithful and are lost. In contrast tothis elitist view, the Kuzari ’s Jewish Rabbi ties together the fate of theunique few who can submit without complaint to the difficulties of Exilewith that of the vast majority among the Jews who lack the ability to

80Kamal al-dın, p. 356, n. 50.81Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 26, 151–153, n. 9–10; 188–189, n. 43; 211, n. 20; Kamal al-

dın, pp. 304, n. 16; 347, n. 35. Also E. Kohlberg, “In praise of the few,” pp. 149–150;M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 257–258.

82See M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 280, 409–410, n. 24for the Shı↪ı “theory of opposites” (ad. dad, d. iddiyya). I believe that one can seein this the same gradual, quasi-evolutionary process, in which the bifurcations anddivision of early Islam are seen as leading to the initial selection of the Shı↪a fromthe general mass of Muslims believers, while the later subdivisions and schisms —especially those related to the Occultation — are seen as more specifically aimed atrevealing the authentic core believers from among the Shı↪a themselves. See my laterdiscussion on the Shı↪ı conception of the Occultation as a prolonged trial period.

83Kuzari II, 44: p. 106, ll. 5–7 (wa-s.irna mutakallifın wa-’l-↪alam fı da↪a wa-rah. awa-’l-balaya al-h. alla bina sabab li-s.alah. dınina wa-khulus. al-khalis. minna wa-khurujal-zıf ↪anna); Shirei HaKodesh, vol. I, p. 211, column 16; vol. 2, p. 433, column 41.

84Kuzari I, 115: p. 62, ll. 20–27. Also: ibid., V, 20: p. 352, ll. 3–5.


withstand the trial. He does not adopt the line of thought that winnowsout the masses to ensure the salvation of the few. The Rabbi’s centralpoint is rather that the pure minority already worthy of redemption mustpay a heavy price for the failings of the majority of the Jewish masses,and bear the prolongation of Exile. The Rabbi then continues (in I: 115)to defend this majority of sinners: even though they are incapable ofwithstanding the difficult test of Exile and suffering, they nonethelessremain an integral part of the persecuted group — their very refusalto take the easy option of assimilating into the powerful Islamic rulingclass makes them part of the faithful.85 Within this context, it becomesclear that Halevi is using the metaphors of winnowing and smelting ina way that is fundamentally different from that of the Shı↪ı writers: hesees Exile as a process of purifying and cleansing sin and transgression(tamh. ıs. al-dhunub), rather than as a sectarian process of the selectionof the few from the multitude.86

At this point, it is worth noting the unique position developed byal-Nu↪manı in the introductory chapter of his Kitab al-ghayba. Here, hediscusses the test of faith embodied by the Occultation as a specifiedprolonged trial period (amad). Basing himself on a h. adıth traditionassociated with the sixth Imamı Shı↪ı Imam Ja↪far al-S. adiq regardingQur↩an 57:16, he places the Occultation within the broader perspectiveof the Islamic vision of history. God gave books of revelation to those whopreceded Islam (i.e. the Jews and the Christians), and then granted thema prolonged trial period (al-amad) to prove their faithfulness; each failedHim one after the other. According to the common interpretation, God

85Ibid., I: 115: p. 62, ll. 22–25. For the Imamı Shı↪ı writers, a Shı↪ı had but toexpress an element of doubt concerning the Occultation of the Imam to be consideredoutside the fold, regardless of his behavior and belief. In contrast, according to theKuzari, a Jew would actually have to take the drastic action of crossing all boundariesand changing religions in order to be considered lost. What is interesting in Halevi’sapproach here is how he underplays the difficulty of such an action, and insteademphasizes the ease and accessibility of conversion, at least in regards to joiningIslam, and highlights the possibility of integrating into Muslim society. See also: IV,23: p. 264, ll. 18–22.

86Kuzari, III, 11: p. 160, ll. 12–22; IV, 23: p. 264, ll. 19–22. This interpretation isreinforced by Halevi’s repeated juxtaposition of the motif of smelting with the idea ofatonement for sin. See Shirei Hakodesh, vol. I, p. 211, columns 15–17, 41: “he dothweep while the son of the maidservant / from Egypt doth laugh / all this to smeltthe dross / to return you to your youth / Behold the sin is absolved and God desiresHis nation” (hu yivkeh u-ben ha-↩ama/ ha-mitzrit negdo mezah. ek / kol zeh le-zarefsigekha / le-hashivkha el ne↪urekha / hineh ha-↪avon nirza ve-Adonai be-↪amo rozeh);vol. II, 433, ll. 40–42: “ the waiting / and the delays / in Kedar and Nevaioth / foryou have crushed / and smelted them / plunged to the deeps / and still they / clingto Thee / and await Thy salvation” (ha-shiyot / ha-deh. iyot / ↪alei kedar ve-nevayot/ ki ↪initem/ ve-ziraftem/ ve-horadetem tah. tiyot / ve-hem be-khol zot / bekha oh. azot/ le-yeshu↪atkha zofiyot). See also Kuzari IV, 23: p. 264, l. 22.

270 Ehud Krinis

turns in this verse to those who receive the new book — the Muslims— and calls on them not to follow in the path of their predecessors,who were given a book of revelation but failed to withstand the trialperiod that followed.87 In keeping with the tradition attributed to theImam al-S. adiq, al-Nu↪manı interprets this divine call as an address to thecommunity of Muh.ammad (ummat Muh. ammad) — identified by him asthe Shı↪ı congregation (ma↪shar al-Shı↪a)88 — and argues that for theMuslims, the prolonged trial period is the length of the Occultation ofthe Twelfth Imam (inna al-amada amadu al-ghayba), and that the peoplebeing tested are the chosen community of the Shı↪a.89 As this theme isdeveloped throughout the work, the negative implications of his readingbecome clear: the community of Muh.ammad is failing the trial period ofthe Occultation, just as the previous People of the Book, the Jews andChristians, failed the prolonged trial period they were granted. Only thechosen few, the choicest of all the Shı↪a, will make it to the redemptionembedded in the glory of the reappearance of the absent Imam; onlythey will be saved from the prolonged trial period that was originallygranted to all the Shı↪a.

I believe that the Kuzari contains hints of a similar conception ofExile-as-prolonged-trial-period at two points in the dialogue betweenthe Jewish sage and the King of Khazar. The first is the passage inKuzari I, 115 discussed above, which sees the duration of Exile and thedelay of redemption as resulting from the failure of the majority of theJews to suffer the pain and hardship of Exile with appropriate faith andsubmission to God’s will. Implicit within this is the contention thatExile is a prolonged trial period that will continue to lengthen until themajority of the Jews will manage to bear the burden of Exile properly,during which time the generation capable of receiving the Messiah willripen. In this case, the prolonging of the trial period is meant to ensurethat most of the nation will pass the divine test, rather than purifyingthe few.90

Another aspect of this idea is embedded in the “parable of the seed”in Kuzari IV, 23. Halevi’s expressive imagery makes it difficult to re-strict this passage to a definitive meaning. However, it seems that theparable is pointing to an intrinsic connection between Israel’s existence

87See, for example, interpretations of this verse found in the fifteenth-centurycanonic Sunnı commentary known as Tafsır al-Jalalayn.

88See the other appellations with which al-Nu↪manı marks the Shı↪ı camp inthis context: al-↪is. aba al-mansuba ila al-tashayyu↪ al-muntamiya ila nabiyyihaMuh. ammad wa-alihi (Kitab al-ghayba, p. 20); Ahl al-h. aqq (ibid., p. 23).

89Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 24–25; see Ithbat al-was.iyya, pp. 29–30 for a reconfigurationof the Flood story along the lines of the Shı↪ı conception of the prolonged trial period(amad).

90Kuzari I, 115: p. 62, ll. 20–27.


within exile — likened to that of a dormant seed in the soil — and thenecessary transformation of the way in which the two other monotheis-tic religions (al-milal), Christianity and Islam, relate to Judaism.91 It isthis transformation that will prepare the way for the coming of the Mes-siah, catalyzing the change from the exilic period to the messianic era.Redemption can come only when it is the shared and unified goal of allthree monotheistic religions.92 If this interpretation is correct, and theJewish Rabbi’s eschatological-utopian demand that the Christians andMuslims “recognize the excellence of the root that they used to disdain”(wa-h. ına↩idhin yufad. d. iluna al-as. l alladhı kanu yurdhilunahu) is a pre-condition for the transition from Exile to redemption, there is anotheraspect to Halevi’s conception of Exile as a prolonged trial period. TheExile of the Jews from their land is lengthened as a test for the Chris-tians and Muslims, who must learn to change their current attitude ofcontempt and instead to reaffirm the position of Israel as God’s chosennation, acknowledging the Jews’ full right to the Holy Land.93 Accord-ing to this passage in the Kuzari, the period of Exile is drawn out inorder to bring about the utopian vision of a new pan-religious harmonichierarchy, which cannot be established without the positive contributionof the Christians and Muslims — contributions that have yet to come.94

As we see, Halevi’s conception of the Jewish Exile as a prolongedtest period comes to establish unity — whether internal Jewish unity, asindicated by Kuzari I, 115; or inter-religious unity, as indicated by IV,23. This stands in clear contrast to al-Nu↪manı’s ideas regarding the du-ration of the Occultation, which are sectarian and divisive. These sharpdifferences can be partially traced to diverging conceptions of history.Al-Nu↪manı bases himself on Muslim historiography, which sees Islamas the final stage of a historical process that began with Judaism and

91This identification of the religious communities (milal) mentioned by the JewishRabbi in IV, 23 as the Christians and Muslims is based on the juxtaposition withother uses of the term in IV, 13: p.254, l. 9; IV, 22: pp. 262, l. 27; 264, l. 3.

92IV, 23: pp. 264, l. 23–266, l. 8.93D.J. Lasker, “Judah Halevi on eschatology and Messianism,” p. 95. The Christian

and Muslim representatives in the opening of the Kuzari (I, 4–9) both acknowledgethe position of the ancient people of Israel as the original chosen people of the biblicalperiod. However, each raises different arguments typifying the theologies of theirrespective religions as to why God moved away from Israel, and chose them instead.Therefore, the Jewish Rabbi’s demand (IV, 23) that the Muslims and Christiansrecognize the position of Israel as the chosen nation must be read as referring to anacknowledgement that runs throughout all of history, rather than being limited tothe distant past. In this context see Daniel J. Lasker’s groundbreaking studies onhow the Kuzari relates to Christianity and Islam: D.J. Lasker, “Proselyte Judaism,”pp. 75–92; idem, “Judah Halevi on eschatology and Messianism,” pp. 97–102. Seealso Krinis, The idea of the chosen people, pp. 240-247.

94See, in this context, Y. Silman, Philosopher and Prophet, p. 261.

272 Ehud Krinis

continued with Christianity: the Muslims are the final chosen group,receiving the last — and definitive — book of revelation. Judah Halevi,on his side, bases himself on the Jewish view of history, which sees Israeland the first and final chosen, God’s everlasting nation. In other words,from al-Nu↪manı’s Islamic-Shı↪ı perspective, the Jews, the Christians,and even the non-Shı↪ı Muslims, have used up the prolonged trial periodthey had been granted, and have completed their part and dropped offthe face of history; the Occultation is a test of the Shı↪a alone. FromHalevi’s Jewish viewpoint, however, the Christians and Muslims haveyet to fulfill their historic role, and can still contribute so long as theExile of Israel runs its course.

There is another aspect to the idea of Exile-as-test-of-faith, to whichthe Kuzari gives a particularly powerful expression: the rejection of aquantitative, power-based vision of history. This is an important themethroughout the Kuzari, and is clearly set into place at the opening of thedialogue, when the King of the Khazars invites the Christian and Muslimdelegates to his court, while rejecting the Jewish representative because“what is obvious from their despicable condition [in Exile], paltry num-bers, and everybody’s loathing for them is quite sufficient [for me toignore them].”95 In contrast, the king shows great respect for Christian-ity and Islam as the two powerful, dominant religions that “have dividedup the world between themselves.”96 In other words, at the opening ofthe dialogue, the King of the Khazars is presented as someone who viewshistory through the prism of power, respecting those whose might is ap-parent and who dominate world events (the Christians and Muslims),and dismissing those who are weak and downtrodden (the exiled Jews).What follows is a gradual change, which leads the king to reverse hisdecision and call for a representative of Judaism (I, 10). On an ideolog-ical level, this is a movement away from the initial power-based view ofhistory, and the adoption of a new perspective: when the king prefersJudaism — despite its wretched state — to Islam and Christianity, heis basing himself on criteria other than power. The King’s new perspec-tive, which enables him to comprehend Israel’s inherent superiority tothe Christians and Muslims despite of their apparent inferiority, springsfrom a qualitative view of history.97

In a later part of the dialogue, immediately preceding the “parable ofthe seed” (IV, 20–22), the Kuzari raises the theme again in the context

95Kuzari I, 4: p. 8. ll. 21–22: wa-amma al-yahud wa-kafa ma z.ahara min dhillati-him wa-qillatihim wa-maqt al-jamı↪ lahum.

96Ibid., I, 2: p. 8, l. 4: al-nas.ranı wa-’l-muslim alladhına iqtasama al-ma↪mura.97For a detailed analysis of the change that occurs in the King of Khazar’s con-

sciousness, and its intellectual basis in Shı↪ı concepts, see E. Krinis, “The legitimistinheritance question,” pp. 62–68.


of a discussion concerning the Jewish condition in Exile. In this passage,the now-converted king98 expresses despair over the historical situationof the Jews, arguing that the spiritual-creative breakdown caused by theprolonged state of Exile does not allow for a return of the divine light toIsrael.99 In response, the Rabbi implicitly accuses the king of returningto his initial standpoint, where he viewed history through the prism ofpower. True, says the Rabbi, on the basis of the objective facts of “ourdespicable condition. . . our poverty, and. . . our dispersion” in contrastto “the triumph of others, their success in the world,” one might saythat “our [Israel’s] light is extinguished,” and that “their subjugationof us [proves] that [the] light belongs to them.” However, the JewishRabbi defines this focus on the visible facts of history, on comparativesupremacy, as looking without “the eye of insight” (↪ayn al-bas. ıra).100

The “eye of insight,” which is capable of seeing the hidden light withinIsrael even in the difficult subjugated conditions of Exile, is also freedfrom a quantitative, power-based focus on the measurement of victoriesand conquest, propagation and expansion, wealth and glory. Insightfullooking replaces these false values with true ones: the willingness tobear the weight of the poverty, humiliation, suffering and martyrdomthat falls to those who are persecuted, subjugated, and weak within theactuality of history.101

A new conception of the test-of-faith emerges from this passage. Ev-ery Jew is given a choice of looking at his and his nation’s life in oneof two ways: he can either choose to blind himself with a power-basedview of history, which will destroy all hope, and make his existence andidentity a burden; or he can choose an a qualitative rather than quanti-tative view of history, and with the “eye of insight” see the light hiddenwithin his and his nation’s exilic state, granting meaning and hope to hisexistence. He can turn a burden into a vocation. This is the profound,fundamental test that Exile presents to each and every Jew.

Like the Kuzari, early Imamı Shı↪ı literature resoundingly rejectsa quantitative, power-based view of history that automatically assigns

98The story of the king’s conversion to Judaism, and the consequent conversion ofhis entire nation, is told in the opening section of book II of the Kuzari (II, p. 68, ll.1–16).

99Kuzari IV, 20: p. 262, ll. 21–22.100Ibid., IV, 21: pp. 262, ll. 23–26.101In defending this view (IV, 22: pp. 262, l. 27–264, l. 14), the King of the Khazars

turns not to the Jewish past, but rather to the historical precedents set in the annalsof Christianity and Islam. At the formative stage of their development, before theirrise to power and dominion, while still suffering from weakness and persecution,early Christians and Muslims set the model for a qualitative, anti-quantitative viewof history. In articulating this, the King of the Khazars follows and bases himself onthe Rabbi’s own examples in I, 113: p. 62, ll. 9–17.

274 Ehud Krinis

truth to the majority, to the powerful, victorious side. In accordancewith its elitist-sectarian approach, and its numerical and political weak-ness relative to other Muslim groups, it prefers the view in which truth isalways in the hands of the chosen few. This position is clearly expressedin the openly polemic passages of early Shı↪ı literature that argue againstthe proto-Sunnı and Sunnı approaches holding that truth is always to befound with the majority.102 It is also implicitly present in early ImamıShı↪ı historiographic texts that describe the Shı↪ı community as the smallchosen group that has existed since the dawn of time, and has been per-secuted throughout history by those who held the power in each and ev-ery era. These descriptions are particularly prominent in Ibn Babuya’scomposition, and are also emphasized in a contemporaneous work knownas Ithbat al-was. iyya lil-Imam ↪Alı b. Abı T. alib (The Testament to theSuccession connected to the Imam ↪Alı b. Abı T. alib), attributed to thepro-Shı↪ı historian ↪Alı b. al-H. usayn al-Mas↪udı (d. 956).103

As in other cases, al-Nu↪manı plays a prominent part in taking a gen-eralized Shı↪ı approach and applying it to the Occultation, which in thiscase gives it the added meaning of a test of faith. Al-Nu↪manı does so byconnecting a tradition associated with the fifth Shı↪ı Imam Muh.ammadal-Baqir with the words attributed to the First Imam, the father-figure ofthe Imamı Shı↪a, ↪Alı b. Abı T. alib. The Imam al-Baqir’s interpretationof the Q 3:200104 is read as a reference to the importance of remember-ing the virtue of patience (s.abr) while waiting for the absent Imam toreturn. This faithful waiting receives the overtones of a test when seenin the context of ↪Alı’s saying: “While walking the straight path, letnot thy spirit fail at how few follow it” (la tastawh. ishı fı t.arıq al-hudali-qillat man yaslukuhu/li-qillat ahlihi).105 According to al-Nu↪manı, the“path” mentioned by the Imam ↪Alı is not the straight path open toall at every time, but rather the path of the Shı↪ı faithful throughoutthe period of the Occultation. Connecting this to the Imam al-Baqir’swords, he argues that the test for the Shı↪ı believers is to continue on

102E. Kohlberg, “In praise of the few,” pp. 152–156. This Sunnı approach finds itsmost concise articulation in the h. adıth that attributes the following declaration toMuh. ammad: “God will always side with the majority” (yad Allaa ma↪a/ ↪ala al-jamı↪

— ibid., p. 156).103See Kamal al-dın, pp. 127–159; 213–220, n. 2; 224–228, n. 20. See also Ithbat

al-was.iyya, pp. 21–30 (a description of the situation in the generations between Sethand Noah), pp. 38–39 (the situation in the generation of Peleg), pp. 51, 53 (thesituation during the Exile and enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt), p. 69 (thesituation following the death of Joshua), 80, 82, 83. See in this context E. Kohlberg,“Some Shı↪ı views of the antediluvian world,” pp. 41, 44–51.104“O believers, be patient, and vie you in patience; be steadfast; fear God; haply

so you will prosper” (A.J. Arberry translation).105Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 26–28.


this path in hope and patience: they must clearly understand that thisis the path of the righteous few, of those who can view history from ananti-quantitative perspective, while the masses leave the true path tofollow the mirage of a power-based, quantitative view of history.

Al-Nu↪manı emphasizes this point by juxtaposing the above-men-tioned quote from ↪Alı with yet another saying attributed to the father-figure of the Shı↪a:

Be with those who are as bees among the winged creatures.The other winged creatures think them weak, but if theycould see their inside [an alternate version adds here: “is fullof blessing”], they would retract [their opinion]” (kunu fı al-nas ka-’l-nah. l fı al-t.ayr, laysa shay ↩ min al-t.ayr illa wa-huwayastad. ↪ifuha, wa-law ya↪lamu ma fı ajwafiha lam yaf ↪al bihaka-ma yaf ↪alu).

This statement is based on a differentiation between the shallow viewof the masses, the “winged creatures,”who look at the surface qualitiesof size and power, and the penetrating view that characterizes the fewwho follow the precepts of ↪Alı. The point that divides the “bees” —i.e. the Shı↪a — from the other “winged creatures” — i.e. other Mus-lims — is specifically this insightful looking, this qualitative view of theworld, which protects the Shı↪a from the beckonings of the false sur-face.106 This insight becomes especially important during the period ofthe Occultation, when the divergence between the external facts and thehidden realities is heightened. On the one hand, the surface realities ofthe weakness of the Shı↪a and the loss of the Imam are emphasized; onthe other hand, this difficult and terrible period is truly the sign of theinner process that will lead to the messianic appearance of the Imam,and the salvation of the faithful few.

To sum up, conceptions of Exile and the Occultation share a centralline of thought. Both are seen as vital test periods that bring to thefore the central dilemmas of the respective chosen groups, demandinga fundamental choice: Do they surrender to the power-based view of

106Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 25–26; 209–210, n. 17. See also E. Kohlberg, “Taqiyya inShı↪ı theology and religion,” p. 358, as well as ibid., n. 74 (for other references tothe comparison of the Shı↪a to bees, differentiated from other winged creatures); I.Goldziher, “Schi↪itsches,” pp. 532–533. For more on the uniqueness of the bees andtheir special internal qualities that are compared to the characteristics of the chosenShı↪a group throughout the ages, see also the famous, classical parable brought ina contemporaneous Shı↪ı Isma↪ılı composition: Rasa↩il ikhwan al-s.afa↩, vol. II, pp.301, 308–309. See the new edition Epistles of the Brethren of Purity: the case of theanimals versus man before the king of the jin. An Arabic critical edition and Englishtranslation of Epistle 22. Eds. and trans. L. E. Goodman and R. McGregor, pp.173, 183 (Arabic), 232, 241 (English).

276 Ehud Krinis

history, and so despair, losing their unique identity as they assimilateinto the dominant culture, or do they hold on to a qualitative vision thattranscends questions of power, and so protect the conceptual space thatsustains their singular existence. This choice is the key to redemption.107

E. Passivity and activity

Within the historical development of Islam, the emergence of the Shı↪acame hand in hand with the Shı↪ı faithful’s clear sense of a great wrongdone to the legacy and testament of the Prophet — and with all the feel-ings of rage that accompany such awareness. The legacy was connectedto Muh.ammad’s explicit designation of ↪Alı b. Abı T. alib — cousin, son-in-law, and father to the Prophet’s only grandchildren — as his officialheir, future head of the Muslim community. The Shı↪ı version of Is-lamic history insists that ↪Alı and his descendants from the house of theProphet, “the people of the house” (ahl al-bayt), are Muh.ammad’s trueheirs, and the only appropriate leaders for Muslim society. Anyone whostands in their place is a usurper and tyrant who has stolen the Caliphatefrom those to whom it rightfully belongs. This decisive view, which isgenerally accepted by all segments of the Shı↪a, stamped as illegitimatealmost any government that held power during the first centuries of Is-lam — and even beyond.108 In the early stages of the development of

107There is another issue beyond the scope of this essay, which is limited to a focuson Exile and the Occultation per se: namely, the way Judah Halevi pushes this ideaa step further. In the Kuzari I, 113: p. 62 ll. 9–17, the Rabbi argues that historicalprecedence shows that early Christians and Muslims were forced to adopt a view ofhistory that was not power-based so long as they were in a position of weakness,before they became the dominant group. The King answers this contention withdoubts as to the ultimate value of an approach that is developed only under duress,and can be maintained only in a position of political helplessness, like that of the Jewsin Exile. Indeed, he says, the Jews themselves will abandon this non-power basedapproach when they return to power and sovereignty in the future (I, 114: p. 62, ll.18–19). Halevi does not supply an answer to this question. The Rabbi’s reply in I,115 is limited to the exilic period, and does not address the future horizons introducedby the King’s question. What is relevant in our context is not whether there is ananswer to the King’s contention, but rather the fact that by articulating the question,Halevi raises the prospect of an alternative way of viewing redemption, without theapocalyptic, aggressive elements of punishment and vengeance due to the change inpower relations. In contrast, Imamı Shı↪ı eschatological thought and imaginationis characterized by a strong apocalyptic overtone, and a focus on retribution andretaliation against all those who have injured the Shı↪a. Within this framework, thepossibility raised by Halevi in Kuzari I: 114 is simply inconceivable.108M. Momen, An introduction to Shı ↪ı Islam, pp. 11–22; M. Sharon, “Ahl al-bayt

— people of the house,” pp. 169–184.


the Shı↪a, this fundamental belief in the illegitimacy of the regime madethem a dangerous oppositional element that worked to undermine andtopple existing governments in favor of legitimate rule by one of the de-scendants of ↪Alı.109 This activist dissenting position found its clearestideological statement in the important Zaydiyya stream of early Shı↪ism,which emphasized the value of khuruj — i.e. the need for armed struggleand violent uprising in order to bring down the illegitimate regime andestablish a caliphate under the legitimate leadership of a descendent of↪Alı in its place.110

The emergence of the Imamı Shı↪a must be seen against this backdropof early Shı↪ı development (since the late seventh century), a period thatwas seminal to the various Shı↪a streams, and that was dominated bythose who called for active resistance to the regime. The middle of theeighth century saw the formation of the Imamı Shı↪a counter-movement,which was openly opposed to any active attempt to challenge or deposethe existing government. Passivity, therefore, is one of the definitive,characteristic, hallmarks of the Imamı Shı↪a from its inception.111

Within this context, Imamı Shı↪ı texts dedicated to the Occultationof the Imam were able to integrate the need to accept the Imam’s ab-sence with earlier beliefs seamlessly, seeing in it a powerful ratificationof the foundational position of passivity. Throughout the period of theOccultation, the Shı↪ı faithful are enjoined to behave with submissiveacceptance; this is seen as an integral continuation of the behavior de-manded of them before the Occultation, with the issuance of the Imamıedict of dissimulation (taqiyya), commanding them to hide their identity,and to conceal their unique beliefs.112 The faithful expectation (intiz. ar)for the appearance of the “awaited Imam” (al-imam al-muntaz.ar) istherefore a passive anticipation, patiently holding on while refrainingfrom taking any action to bring it closer.113

Theologically, this approach is connected to the descriptions of themissing Imam as a completely passive figure: the fundamental facts ofhis going into hiding, the length of the Occultation, and his final emer-gence are all beyond his control, imposed upon him by divine decree.Accordingly, it is fitting for the followers of the missing Imam to also bepassive, and to refrain from taking any steps to shorten the Occultation

109W. Madelung, “Shı↪a,” EI2, s.v.110W. Madelung, “Imama,” EI2, s.v.111W. Madelung, “Shı↪a,” EI2, s.v.; A.R. Lalani, Early Shı ↪ı thought, pp. 50–52.112Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 33–38, n. 1–12; 203–204, n. 4; Kamal al-dın, p. 371, n. 5.

For more on the importance of taqiyya in the early Imamı Shı↪ı worldview, see E.Kohlberg, “Taqiyya in Shı↪ı theology and religion;” L. Clarke, “The rise and declineof Taqiyya in Twelver Shı↪ism.”113Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 158, n. 3; 196–200, n. 5–13, 15–16; Kamal al-dın, p. 330, n.

15.

278 Ehud Krinis

or to speed redemption in opposition to God’s will.114 The passivitywith which the Imam’s followers are charged is a reflection of the pas-sivity forced upon the Imam. The Shı↪a will be able — and required— to shake off their passivity only when the Imam emerges from thestate of Occultation to take his place openly in history as messiah andredeemer.115 Shı↪ı tradition describes this future transition from passiv-ity to activity as immediate, abrupt, and shocking, a sudden awakeningfrom a long slumber. It is to be a miraculously sharp change, in whichthe Shı↪a will shake off any traces of the Occultation period’s passivity,and jump directly into the intense, violent actions that will help bringabout the Shı↪ı messianic period.116

The Imamı Shı↪ı conception of the Occultation, then, is characterizedby a tension-filled combination of opposing demands. On the one hand,the messianic-apocalyptic vision grants the Imam and his followers adynamic, vigorous, and world-changing mission upon the completionof the Occultation; on the other hand, there is an unambiguous, clearrequirement to be completely passive, and to hold back from any action,be it word or deed, that will hasten the messianic goal during the periodof the Occultation. In this context, the complete passivity mandatedby patient acquiescence to the Occultation can be seen as the necessaryprologue to the immense energies released by the coming of the Imam:it compresses the spring in preparation for the powerful recoil that willcatapult the rapid transition into the vengeful, apocalyptic battles of themessianic era.117 When seen from this perspective, the demand for utterpassivity in force throughout the period of the Occultation is an integralpart of redemption, an appropriate prelude to the dramatic descriptionsof the reappearance of the absent Imam in Imamı Shı↪ı literature.118

114Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 187, n. 40; 194–199, n. 2, 5–13; 279, n. 64; Kamal al-dın, p.349. n. 49.115When this time comes, the Shı↪a are called to stand armed at the Imam’s side,

to join him even if they have to crawl through the snow. See Kitab al-ghayba, pp.154, n. 12; 194, n. 1; 197, n. 6; 306, n. 17; Kamal al-dın, p. 326, n. 5. The Imam’semergence will bring to a close the temporary one-sided truce (hudna) that the Shı↪awillingly took upon themselves, and they will once again attack their enemies. SeeE. Kohlberg, “Taqiyya in Shı↪ı theology and religion,” p. 368.116Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 315–316, n. 8, 11; Kamal al-dın, pp. 480, n. 5; 673, n. 24. On

the apocalyptic nature of the reappearance of the Imam-Messiah in Shı↪ı literature,see D. Cook, Studies in Muslim apocalyptic, pp. 189–229; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, Thespirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 405–412.117See in this context the tradition that describes the period of the coming of the

Shı↪ı messianic Imam as a time of “blood, sweat, and sleeping on the saddle” (al-↪alaqwa-’l-↪araq wa-’l-nawm ↪ala al-suruj ) for him and his followers. Kitab al-ghayba, pp.283–285, n. 1–5.118Further discussion of this issue is beyond the scope of this essay. I will just note

in passing that this is connected to the fact that in Shı↪ı literature, the role of theEmergence from Occultation is parallel to (and replaces) that of the Resurrection of


In contrast to the clear-cut approach of early Shı↪ı writing, whichhighlights the need for utter passivity during the period of the Occul-tation, Judah Halevi’s ideas regarding the appropriate way to bear theweight of Exile are more complex, moving along an axis from passivity toactivity. On the one end are the previously cited words of the Rabbi inKuzari I, 115, in which he emphasizes the obligation incumbent on theJews to surrender to the humiliations of exile, to choose an attitude ofsubmission and humility (khud. u↪). This is an acceptance of passivity, andwithin this context, the discussion regarding the coming of the awaitedredemption (li-’l-furqan al-muntaz.ar) is connected to an inactive antici-pation similar in kind to the anticipation of the awaited Imam-Messiah(al-imam/al-qa↩im al-muntaz.ar) in Shı↪ı tradition.119 This position isfurther developed in the third section of the Kuzari, where the Rabbiemphasizes the values of patience and submission to divine will (limayaksibu al-nas min al-hidaya li-’l-s.abr wa-’l-taslım), arguing that thesecharacteristics will allow the Jews to survive not only the hardships ofExile, but all the tribulations of life.120

Yet on the other hand, Judah Halevi places pro-activity at the centerof his theological thinking when he speaks of the “divine order” or “divineaffair” (al-amr al-ilahı) that expresses the presence of God within chosenindividuals and the chosen people. Here, the Rabbi declares that “thedivine order only takes hold of a person in proportion to his preparationfor it. If it is slight then it will be slight; if it is great then it willbe great.”121 This assertion is made within the context of the debate

the dead in the Qur↩an. In the Qur↩an, however, the eschatological process is bound upwith the resurrection of the dead, and so takes place after the destruction of the world:it is beyond the bounds of history. In Shı↪ı literature, by contrast, the eschatologicalvision is integrated into history, and so given a historical aspect and meaning. Theemergence of the Imam from the Occultation is depicted as the equivalent of theResurrection through the citation and interpretation of Qur↩an verses: the passiveposition of the Imam and his followers throughout the period of the Occultation isseen as a kind of death within history, while the return to active participation inevents is a resurrection, a restoration of life appropriate to the apocalyptic end ofdays. Yet all this takes place within the framework of history. This interpretationpoints to one of deepest theological layers of the Occultation: it is a period of deathwithin history, awaiting the redeeming historical resurrection that comes at its end.See M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 404–405, 426–427; idem,“Eschatology in Imamı Shı↪ism,” EIr, s.v.119Kuzari I, 115: p. 62, ll. 20–27.120Kuzari III, 11: 160 l. 17 ff. One must note that in this context, bearing the

burden of exile with submission and patience is contrasted to an attitude of angerand resentment. See: III, 12: p. 162, ll. 1–3. For more on the connection betweena vision of exile-as-punishment and the submissive acceptance of its hardships asan appropriate reparation until “the time comes” see Shirei HaKodesh, vol. II, pp.612–613, columns 9–16.121Kuzari II, 24: p. 92, ll. 16–18: fa-inna al-amr al-ilahı innama yatamakkanu min

280 Ehud Krinis

(Kuzari II, 24) concerning the return to Zion in the Second Temple era,which the Rabbi argues was only a partial redemption, in contrast to theexodus from Egypt, which was a full redemption. The difference is seenas springing from the unresponsiveness of the Jews exiled to Babylon,especially the noblest among them. They did not take the necessarysteps of leaving their homes in exile and returning to their land — andso they minimized redemption.122

When seen in the broader context of the work as a whole, this as-sertion resonates with the previous passage in the dialogue, in whichthe King of Khazars rebukes the Rabbi, who as a Jew in exile, cut offfrom the Land of Israel, remains in a situation where he cannot bring tofruition the full breadth of the Torah.123 In his response to the king inII, 24, the Rabbi admits the justness of the rebuke, and places the king’swords within the theological model of the “divine order.” Throughoutthe Kuzari, the concept of the “divine order” (al-amr al-ilahı) is system-atically connected to the principle of reciprocity: the pro-active prepara-tion of God’s chosen on the lower plain is essential for drawing down ofthe divine emanation from the higher plane.124 This is the idea drivingthe Rabbi’s activist approach in II, 24, in which he argues that the peo-ple of Israel must initiate the redemption on the lower plane by makingan effort to dwell within the Promised Land — that the individual stepsof individual Jews are vital to triggering the end of exile. This program-matic call for a pro-active approach is fundamentally different from theShı↪ı view, which rejects any possibility that the chosen believers on thelower planes can contribute to ending the period of Occultation, can inany way trigger the arrival of redemption. For the Shı↪a, all of this mustbe initiated by the Almighty decisionmaker in the higher planes.

The tension between the Kuzari ’s passive acceptance of Exile and itsproactive commitment to bringing it to a close comes to a head in thefinale (V, 22–27), where there is an open verbal clash. In this passage,it is the King of Khazars who takes the passive position, using the keyword “intention” (niyya), while the Rabbi takes the activist position,focusing on the key word of “action” (↪amal). The king defends thepassive stance by focusing on the inner commitment and intention ofthe believer, arguing that “pure intention and fervent desire” (al-niyya

al-mar ↩ bi-qadr isti ↪dadihi lahu in kana qalılan fa-qalıl wa-in kana kathıran fa-kathır.122Ibid., p. 92, l. 4 ff.123Ibid., II, 23: p. 90, l. 16 ff. See in this context Y. Silman, Philosopher and

Prophet, pp. 269–270.124See ibid., II, 14: p. 80, l. 24 ff.; II, 26: p. 94, ll. 10–14. For a systematic formu-

lation of the concept of “the divine order” (al-amr al-ilahı) as the establishment ofa divine conjunction with the prepared element of the chosen in the lower world, seeH. Davidson, “The active intellect in the Cuzari,” pp. 384, 390, 393.


al-khalis.a wa-’l-tashawwuq al-shadıd) is itself a religious act that grantslegitimacy to not taking any active steps to bring about redemption:“the intention is sufficient for God, who knows intentions and reveals thethings that are hidden” (wa-’l-niyya khaliya ma↪a Allah ↪alim al-niyyatwa-kashif ). The strong longing for redemption, the inner commitmentthat the believer can express at any time or place within exile, is anadequate alternative; it precludes the need to actively travel to the Landof Israel, especially considering the terrible dangers entailed by sucha journey.125 In response, the Rabbi argues that every religious actconsists of two essential components, the intention (niyya) and the action(↪amal); neither is sufficient without the other.126 From this generalrule, the sage infers that the non-activist commitment stemming fromintention or contrition — as expressed in the prayer “and because of oursins we were exiled from our land” — is not enough. The longing “forthe awaited matter” (li-’l-amr al-muntaz.ar) of redemption must be sostrong as to lead people to take action to bring it about, must movethem towards the Land of Israel.127

The Kuzari closes by ultimately championing the pro-active position— and so closed the life of Judah Halevi. This final move is linked to theauthor’s distinctive understanding of Exile as severance. As previouslydiscussed, for Halevi the existence of Exile encompasses not only theJews, doomed to live in alien lands, but also the Land of Israel itself,cut off from the choicest element of humanity specially apportioned to itsince the beginning of time. Judah Halevi’s activist position points to theunique interaction between the “native-born Israelite” (isra ↩ılı s.arıh. ),imbued with the invisible element of the “hidden spiritual Shekhinah”(al-sakına al-khafiyya al-ruh. aniyya), and the chosen territory of the Landof Israel, set aside as exclusively suitable for the fulfillment of God’sLaws. This interrelationship can gradually allow for the reappearanceof the “visible Shekhinah” (al-sakına al-z. ahira ↪aynan) that is absent inExile.128

Halevi bases his activist approach of gradual transition from Exileto redemption on the historical precedents of the fathers of the nation

125Kuzari, V, 22: p. 356, ll. 11–14; V 27: p. 358, ll. 21–23.126See ibid., V, 20: p. 346, ll. 15–45 for an introduction to the principal elements of

this discussion.127Ibid., V, 23: pp. 356, l. 24–358, l. 2; V, 27: p. 358, l. 24 ff. While arguing

against the passive position espoused by the king, the Rabbi uses the terms “bravery”(shaja↪a), “precedence” (sabq) and “holy war” (jihad) — all key terms in the Shı↪ı-Sunnı discourse regarding the legitimate leadership of Islam. Halevi adopts theseterms to strengthen the pro-active stance expressed by his mouthpiece. See KuzariV, 23: p. 358, ll. 8–11, as well as E. Krinis, “The legitimist inheritance question,” pp.59–60.128Kuzari V, 23: p. 356, l. 15 ff.

282 Ehud Krinis

— on the deeds of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Each of the Patriarchsacted alone, emigrating from native land to the Land of Israel, long-ing for it within exile and coming back, all without the open presenceof the Shekhinah, in a time when the Land was ruled by the idola-trous Canaanites. Halevi sees the conduct of the Patriarchs as prefatorysteps, the necessary introduction to the full redemption of Israel fromEgypt and the subsequent appearance of the “visible Shekhinah.”129 Itis a primal example of the interaction between the native-born chosenand the Promised Land, and the relationship awakens the latent hiddenShekhinah, gradually paving the way for the appearance of the “visibleShekhinah” in the Land of Israel.130 From Halevi’s perspective, the “fa-thers’ actions are a beacon to the children” — whether fictive, like theKuzari ’s Rabbi, or actual, like Judah Halevi himself. The exceptionalfew who are conscious of their mission are responsible for taking the firstactive steps, for traveling from afar to the Land of Israel, exploring itfrom end to end, lavishing love on its soil and its holy sites — this despitethe fact that it is under alien rule, and that the Shekhinah is not percep-tible within it.131 Judah Halevi saw himself as personally charged withimmigrating to the Land of Israel and making the preparatory overturestowards healing the deep rift, the severing, that had torn the chosenpeople from their holy country during the period of exile. This missionis based on the idea of the “divine order” (al-amr al-ilahı) that needs,and awaits, an awakening from below. His models are the fathers of thenation, who show the way to their distant descendants, lost in the finalexile.

When seen in our comparative context, the most interesting elementof Halevi’s pro-active approach is its gradualism, the fact that it initi-ates an incremental process. The first steps toward redemption are theresponsibility of an exceptional few who feel a sense of personal mission,standard bearers exemplified by the Kuzari ’s Rabbi, or Judah Halevihimself. They and only they begin to act within the darkness of theexilic state, without any support or signs attesting to the immanentcoming of redemption. As in the case of the need for human initiationfrom below (previously discussed), this gradual approach to redemptionis firmly on the side of pro-activity rather than passivity. As such, Ju-

129Kuzari II, 2: pp. 72, l. 21–74, l, 3; II, 20: p. 88, ll. 6–9; II, 23: pp. 96, l. 26–98,l. 3 as well as Shirim, pp. 265–266, columns 5–24 (devarekha be-mor ↪over reqeh. im).130See in this context the description of gradual development, beginning with the

journey of Abraham, the chosen individual, to the Land of Israel, and ending withthe spread of prophecy throughout the descendants of Abraham dwelling in the Landwhen the Shekhinah became manifest, Kuzari II, 14: p. 80 ll. 15–24.131Compare R.P. Scheindlin, The song of the distant dove, pp. 159–160, 169, 179,

212, 250–251.


dah Halevi’s thinking stands in clear opposition to Shı↪ı notions of themessianic appearance of the Imam. Shı↪ı conceptions of redemption re-inforce the order of present passivity, and predict a sudden change: onlythus will the Shı↪ı faithful leap immediately from submissive acceptanceto active participation in the apocalyptic events that will come with theopen appearance of the Imam.

The Divine Default

The axis mundi of Judah Halevi’s theological thought is the alignmentbetween “the Living God” (al-ilah al-h. ayy) and “the Living Community”(al-milla al-h. ayya).132 This conceptual axis delineates the interrelation-ship between God as “the Living God” — i.e., as the power that ispresent within history, manifested in the world, rather than the Creatorwho set into place the parameters of the universe from the outside —and the historic expression of Israel as “the Living Community,” definingit as one of interdependence: the “living” presence of God, His manifes-tation in history, is determined by the agency of Israel (and prior to theformation of the chosen nation, by the dynastic chain of chosen “uniqueindividuals” [afrad ] stretching from Adam to Jacob).133 All indicationsof the presence of God within history — be it the Revelation at Sinai, thegiving of the Torah, prophecy, miracles, the indwelling of the Shekhinahand the accompanying expression of divine order — all these are mani-fest only within the parameters of the historical existence of the chosennation, Israel.134

In Halevi’s thinking, there is a full correspondence between the his-torical existence of God’s chosen — be they the chosen individuals inthe early period of human history, or the chosen people later on — andthe attribute of God that is manifest within humanity. This correla-tion implies a mutual dependency between the aspect of God expressed

132 Kuzari II, 26: p. 96 ll. 17–20; II: 32: pp. 100 l. 19–102, l. 2; III, 23: p. 178 ll.24–26. The theology of the Kuzari revolves around the concept of “the divine order”(al-amr al-ilahı). However, the very centrality of this idea at times makes it difficultto define: Halevi uses the “divine order” in so many contexts that its exact meaningcan become blurred. In contrast, the combination of “the Living God” and “theLiving Community” appears in only a few — but crucial — passages. It thereforeserves as an excellent key for unlocking the essential implications of “the divine order”in the Kuzari, as both are concepts that deal with the presence of God within thehistory of those chosen by Him.133For more on the Kuzari ’s conception of chosen “unique individuals” (afrad) and

how it relates to Shı↪ı ideas, see E. Krinis, The idea of the chosen people, pp. 35–75.134See the discussion of this matter in ibid., pp. 183–207.

284 Ehud Krinis

as the “Living God” and the historical state of the chosen group: Godas the Lord of History is only present within a particular, well-defined,environment — that of the chosen group in its specific individuals.135

As “the Living Community,” the historical role of Israel is to be a me-diator, the conduit allowing for the manifestation of “the Living God”within humanity as a whole. The expression of God within the worldwill reflect the state of the nation of Israel. When Israel is within itsland, fulfilling its religious rites in the Temple, and keeping all the Lawsconnected to the Land, the conditions are ripe for the Living God to befully present within the Living Community, and so for the Shekhinah,prophecy and miracles. These optimal conditions existed throughoutthe nine hundred-year period of the Tabernacle (mishkan) and the FirstTemple, and persisted in a reduced form throughout the subsequentSecond Temple period.136 Throughout the Kuzari, Halevi carefully con-structs a theological-historiographical system, in which the manifestationand presence of God within history is determined by the historic condi-tions of Israel, giving huge significance to whether the nation is withinthe Chosen Land, performing the rites of worship at its most holy lo-cation. This intensifies the theological implications of the lengthy Exilethat has enveloped Israel since the destruction of the Second Temple.Exile as severance affects not only the people and the land, but GodHimself as “the Living God” of history. Within this context, the veryexistence of the axis connecting “the Living God” and “the Living Com-munity” is threatened by the prolonged disruption of the link betweenthe Chosen People and their land of dwelling and place of worship.

The Kuzari tends to highlight the dire implications of this severance,emphasizing the attenuation of the axis of connection with exilic con-ditions. Halevi points out that all the phenomena that accompany thepresence of the “Living God” — the visible indwelling of the Shekhinahwith its concomitant divine order, prophetic revelation and open mira-cles — cannot continue within the context of Exile, and have vanished.This implies that “the Living God” is also absent so long as the ChosenNation is severed from the Chosen Land.137 What is more, the nationof Israel as “the Living Community” has undergone a concomitant re-

135Halevi’s explanation for why Israel — and only Israel — can serve as an envi-ronment for the manifestation of the divine presence within history is based on ideasthat are hierarchal-biological — and carry distinct Shı↪ı undertones. See S. Pines,“Shı↪ite terms and conceptions,” p. 178 ff.; E. Krinis, The idea of the chosen people,pp. 75–90, 101–141.136Kuzari I, 87: p. 40, ll. 7–9; II, 23: p. 90, ll. 17–19; II, 24: p. 92, ll. 4 ff.; II, 56:

p. 116, ll. 24–26; III, 39: pp. 188, ll. 24–28; 190, ll. 16–24.137To be exact, the “Living God” is not so much absent during Exile as in a default

state of dormant presence, parallel to the state of “the Living Community” duringthis period. See the discussion later in this section.


duction, its state likened to the dry bones of its previous, full-bodiedexistence within its Land.

Exile’s attenuation of the axis connecting “the Living God” and “theLiving Community” has a grievous impact on Israel’s role as the soleintermediary for mankind, reducing the nation’s ability to embody thepresence of “the Living God” for humanity as a whole. This becomes ap-parent when we compare the two openly historiographical passages in theKuzari : the first are the words of the Rabbi in II, 54; the second is the di-alogue between the King of the Khazars and the Rabbi in IV, 10-14. Thehistoriographical argument of II, 54 is optimistic-progressive: the worldas a whole, and the religions that have developed in the wake of Judaismin particular, are developing towards an acceptance of the truth attestedto by the continuous demonstration (burhan) of the singular existenceof Israel within history.138 By contrast, the parallel historiographicalvision developed in IV, 10–13 is pessimistic-regressive:139 the Christiansand Muslims lost their way at the moment they rejected their originalgoal of getting closer to Judaism, and have continued to drift furtheraway ever since.140 The profound difference between the two passagescan be seen as reflecting their historic backdrop. The optimistic histori-ography in II, 54 is articulated within the context of the formative periodof Jewish history: the birth of the nation of Israel, the bequeathing andsettlement of the Chosen Land, and the miraculous rule of divine order(which Halevi attributes to this era).141 The full linkage between theChosen Land, “appointed to guide the entire inhabited world aright”(kanat mawqufa li-hidayat al-ma↪mur),142 and the Chosen Nation “as-signed” to her, allowed Israel to become an embodiment of the “properguidance of the heart,” (hidaya li-’l-qulıb) for the entire world.143 Thehistorical perspective in IV, 10–13, by contrast, is focused on the moreimmediate past: the rise and spread of Christianity and Islam, processeswhich followed in the wake of the destruction of the Second Temple and

138Ibid., pp. 112, ll. 25–114, l. 16. See Krinis, The idea of the chosen people, pp.69–73 for more on the Kuzari ’s sublimated dispute with the Shı↪ı view of history inthis passage.139The divergent visions of history expressed in these two passages are quite explic-

itly linked. In II: 54, the Rabbi closes by saying that all the religious movementsthat arose after the appearance of Israel on the world-stage “were unable to isolate[themselves] from its fundamental principles” (p. 114, l. 13: wa-kull ma ja↩a ba↪dahalam yaqdir an yashidhdha ↪an us. uliha); in IV, 10, the King of the Khazars opens hisspeech by pointing out the fact that the religions that rose after Judaism acknowl-edged its fundamental truths (p. 250, l. 9 ff.: bal al-shara↩i ↪ allatı ba↪dakum aqarratbil-h. aqq wa-lam tunkiruhu. . . ).140Kuzari IV: 11, pp. 250, l. 15–252, l. 6; IV: 13: p. 254, ll. 9–17.141Ibid., II, 54: p. 114, ll. 9–11 in comparison with I, 109: p. 58, ll. 1–18.142Ibid., II, 16: p. 82, ll. 6–8.143Ibid., II, 54: p. 114, ll. 12–16.

286 Ehud Krinis

the severance of Israel from its Land with the concomitant loss of openmanifestations of God’s presence.

It is this rupture that casts a negative shadow over historical devel-opments. Even though the founders of Christianity and Islam originallyacknowledged that the Land of Israel was the chosen territory, the placeto which to turn in prayer (qibla), it was of no avail. For these groups areby definition “the dead communities” (al-milal al-amwat), whose ritesand worship, even if located in the correct place, are unable to reawakenthe signs of God’s presence: “they raised up houses to God, but nota trace of God appeared to them.”144 Within the historical context ofExile, when Israel is severed from its Land, and the link between ‘the Liv-ing God” and “the Living Community” is weakened, Israel is no longera manifest “demonstration” (burhan) for the entire world — and so canno longer fulfill its role in “guiding the hearts” of mankind (hidaya li-’l-qulıb). Without this guidance, the world religions of Christianity andIslam lost their way. Though they originally accepted the centrality ofthe Land of Israel, and acknowledged that the ancient Israelites had beenthe chosen nation,145 they now began to move in the opposite direction— a process that found physical expression in the changed direction ofprayer: they now turn away from the Holy Land towards different direc-tions. In doing so, they also lose the closeness they aimed for, a closenessoriginally within their reach.146 A comparison of the nature of history,as presented in II: 54 and as it emerges from the dialogue in IV: 10-13,exposes the wide-ranging, trans-national implications of the Exile of Is-rael from its Land, and the subsequent severance between “the LivingGod” and “the Living Community.”

Yet side by side with the dominant trend highlighting the severance ofthe connection between “the Living God” and “the Living Community,”the Kuzari also contains redemptive touches that soften this bleak pic-ture. Halevi points to certain foundational elements that are unchanging,that are untouched by Exile. Chief among them are the Sabbath, the fes-tivals, the covenant of circumcision, and the original biblical covenants.These elements work together to preserve the life-giving flow connecting“the Living God” and “the Living Community.” Despite the attenuationand reduction of these channels, the connection continues during the na-tion’s existence within exile, preserving the fundamental differentiation

144Ibid., II, 32: p. 100, l. 19 ff.; IV, 3: p. 230, ll. 10–20.145Ibid., IV, 10: p. 250, ll. 9–14.146This goal of becoming close to God originally allowed the Christians and Muslims

to be classified as “proselytes who have not accepted all of the branches of the law, buthave accepted their roots” (bi-’l-gerim alladhina lam yaqbalu jamı↪ furu↪ al-shara↩i ↪

lakinna us. ulaha). Kuzari IV, 11: p. 250 ll. 15–16. See also: D.J. Lasker, “ProselyteJudaism,” p. 83.


of Israel throughout this crucial period.147 Though Israel may be thedry bones of its former self, it remains the Chosen Nation, bound to Godby eternal vows.

If we turn to Imamı Shı↪ı theology, we see that there is a parallelto Halevi’s axis mundi linking “the Living God” and “the Living Com-munity”: the Shı↪ı connection between God, and the Chosen of God —identified as the prophets and their successors (aws.iya↩) in earlier gen-erations, and as the Islamic Prophet and his successors, the Imams ofhis house, in the present epoch of history. God’s chosen, especially theImams, create the divine upper pelorma as well as the lower mundaneenvironment for God’s manifestation (maz.har, majla), and God revealsHimself only through their agency. However, early Imamı Shı↪ı liter-ature (in contrast to contemporaneous Isma↪ılı-Shı↪ı writing) does notaccept the differentiation made by Judah Halevi between God as the“Lord of Heaven and Earth,” “the Creator of the world and all withinit,” and the God of the “Lord of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” — that is,the God of History.148 It therefore grants broad, cosmological powersto God’s Chosen, especially the Imams: they are mediators for divinefavor (ni ↪ma) not only vis-a-vis humanity, but for the heavens and earthas a whole. The presence and involvement of God within the world isutterly contingent on the existence of these chosen few.149 This wide-ranging dependency is expressed in a multifaceted concept that plays acentral role in Imamı Shı↪a theology: h. ujja (with the broad connotationsof divine evidence, proof, testimony, pledge, guarantee). God’s Chosen,prophets and imams alike, are God’s proofs (h. ujaj Allah) — that is, theirvery existence embodies the verification of, and proof for, the presenceof God, and they are God’s witnesses, guaranteeing divine justice withinthe world.150

Yet wide-ranging as the intermediary role of the hujja may be inImamı Shı↪ı thought, the strong sectarian tendency that dominated tra-ditional Imamı Shı↪ı theology limited the positive effects of this mediationto the domain of a small, well-demarcated group. God has a store of goodset aside for humanity, which is under the jurisdiction of God’s Chosenintermediary, and will be distributed only through his guidance (hidaya).Therefore, these gifts can be given only to those who are completely loyal

147Kuzari II, 34: p. 102, ll. 8–23; III, 9–10: pp. 150, l. 17–152, l. 8.148Kuzari I, 25: p. 18, ll. 4–11. See: Krinis, 2008, pp. 188–201 for more on Isma↪ılı-

Shı↪ı parallels to Judah Halevi’s differentiation.149M.M. Bar-Asher, Scripture and exegesis, p. 138; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The divine

guide, pp. 45–46; idem, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 107–108, 194–196; 249–256, 298–301.150See M.G.S. Hodgson, “H. udjdja,” EI2, s.v. See also Krinis, The idea of the chosen

people, pp. 95–100, 159–160, for more on Judah Halevi’s adoption of aspects of theShı↪ı concept of h. ujja.

288 Ehud Krinis

and utterly devoted to God’s Chosen, present and past. The requirementof utter faithfulness and devotion, connected to the central Shı↪ı valueof walaya, is a personal, individual obligation, incumbent on each andevery believer.151 Yet the ability to maintain complete loyalty is definedby the primordial givens set into place before the advent of history.152

Imamı Shı↪ı writers can consequently divide humanity into two essen-tial categories: the “divine sage” (↪alim rabbanı), and the “disciple whowalks in the direction of salvation” (muta↪allim ↪ala sabıl najat). Any-one who is not among the Chosen who guides, be they prophet or Imam,or one of the faithful Shı↪ı “disciples” who follow “towards salvation,”is not actually fully human. Rather, they are part of the “vile riffraff”(hamaj ra↪a↪) of humanoid creatures who are essentially demonic.153

Let us return to the Imamı Shı↪ı all-encompassing theological con-ception of mediation. All Imamı Shı↪ı writers, be they of the Scholasticor traditional school, would accept as an article of faith that the worldcannot exist, even for a moment, without the presence of God’s chosenh. ujja, who is the necessary link connecting God to the world and theworld to God.154 Within the context of the Occultation, this raises afundamental question: to what extent is God’s proof (h. ujja) required tobe physically present in order to fulfill his essential role as intermediary?Does there need to be a direct link between the Imam and the Shı↪ıcommunity, which alone can benefit from his presence?

The standard answer to this question is founded upon the belief thatthere needs must always be God’s Proof (h. ujja) for the world to exist,and finds expression in the words attributed to the first Shı↪ı Imam,↪Alı b. Abı T. alib, recorded in the most famous and often-cited tradi-tion known as h. adıth Kumayl.155 According to this, God’s proof (h. ujja)retains his power and function, regardless of whether the particular in-dividual is openly embodying the role, or is fulfilling it in anonymoussecrecy: “the world will never lack a standard-bearer who, testifying forGod, guarantees and safeguards His testimony, whether he is manifest

151For more on the centrality of walaya, and its essential role in the worldview of theearly Imamı Shı↪a, see M.M. Bar-Asher, Scripture and exegesis, pp. 195–202; M.A.Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 231–275.152M.M. Bar-Asher, Scripture and exegesis, pp. 199–201; M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The

spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 289–291.153Kamal al-dın, p. 290, n. 2 (from h. adıth Kumayl). See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi,

The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam, pp. 283–287, 303–304.154M.J. Mcdermott, The theology of al-Shaıkh al-Mufıd, pp. 130–131; A.A. Sached-

ina, Islamic messianism, pp. 49–51; M. Momen, An introduction to Shı ↪ı Islam, pp.147–148; Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide in Early Shi ↪ism, p. 43.155This is named after Kumayl b. Ziyad al-Nakha↩ı, ↪Alı’s close friend and follower,

who is seen as the bearer of this tradition, See H. Modarressi, Tradition and survival,p. 74 ff.


and unveiled, or hidden” (la takhlı al-ard. min qa↩im bi-h. ujja imma z. ahirmashhur aw kha↩if maghmur li-la yabt.ulu h. ujaj Allah wa-baynatuhu).156

Beyond this general statement, accepted by all, are varied and complexapproaches offered by different branches of the Shı↪a, which deserve fur-ther study.

The Scholastic school of the Imamı Shı↪a formulated the most sys-tematic and clear-cut answer to the question: there is no need for adirect connection between God’s proof (h. ujja) and his faithful. Whetherhe is a prophet or an imam, he continues to fill the intermediary func-tion demanded by Shı↪ı theology even if he is absent, without any linkto his flock.157 The personal presence of God’s proof (h. ujja) is not re-quired; all that is needed is the fact of his existence. The position ofactually leading and guiding the Shı↪a faithful along the correct path ofaction can be filled by the “scholars” (↪ulama↩) that arise from within thecommunity.158 By taking this theological step, along with several otheraccompanying maneuvers, the Scholastic scholars were eventually ableto unbind what the early writers of the traditional school had perceivedas the unbreakable knot tying together the Imam and his community.This process of unbinding can be seen as a vital step in the develop-ment of the Imamı Shı↪ı movement, allowing for its long-term viabilityin the face of the prolongation of the absence of the Imam over gener-ations and centuries. By offering sophisticated theological answers, theScholastic school was able to free the Imamı Shı↪a from the inclination to-wards sectarian narrowness enforced by the traditional school, and thusopened the way to its continued development into “Twelver Shı↪ısm”(Ithna-↪ashariyya), the main alternative to the Sunnı movement withinthe Islamic world.159

Ibn Babuya is a representative of the traditional Imamı Shı↪ı schoolwho nonetheless drew widely on the intellectual world of the Scholas-tics.160 He too offers an approach to the problem of the necessary level

156 Kamal al-dın, p. 291, n. 2. See Kitab al-ghayba p. 136, n. 1 (the version hereis: imma z. ahir ma↪lum wa-imma kha↩if maghmur). For more on the widespreaddiffusion of h. adıth Kumayl throughout Shı↪ı literature and beyond, see H. Modarressi,Tradition and survival, pp. 77–78. See also M.A. Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality ofShi ↪i Islam, pp. 303–304.157The Scholastic school gives the h. ujja’s role as intermediary a very specific em-

phasis: his main function is to channel Divine Grace (lut.f ) to the faithful. Thisschool also highlights the importance of his position as intercessor (shafı↪), on whichdepends the final destiny of his followers: it is he who allows them to enter Par-adise. See A.A. Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, pp. 130–134; S.A. Arjoman, “Theconsolation of theology,” pp. 561–570.158See the detailed analysis of this topic in A.A. Sachedina, Islamic messianism,

pp. 109–149; S.A. Arjomand, “The consolation of theology.”159See in this context: S.A. Arjomand, “The consolation of theology,” pp. 570–571.160This relationship to Scholastic thinking is apparent in both the structure and

290 Ehud Krinis

of connection between God’s Proof (h. ujja) and those dependent on hismediation. Using the language of the traditional h. adıth, he offers a so-lution that is close in spirit (if not in content) to that offered by theScholastic school. Ibn Babuya cites an important tradition that definesthe role of the imams as God’s proofs (h. ujaj ) in the broad cosmologicalterms accepted by the traditional camp of the early Imamı Shı↪a. Atthe close of the passage, a disciple asks the Imam the following ques-tion: what is the value of God’s Proof (h. ujja) who is absent and inhiding? The Imam answers that God’s proof (h. ujja) in hiding is likethe sun concealed by clouds: while the light is perhaps obscured, it isstill present and continue in providing its benefit to the world (fa-kayfayantafi ↪u al-nas bi-’l-h. ujja al-gha↩ib al-mastur. . . ka-ma yantafi ↪una bi-’l-shams idha sataraha al-sah. ab).161 In other words, Ibn Babuya alsoargues that the Imam continues to act in the intermediary role of God’sproof (h. ujja) even when he is in Occultation, cut off from direct contactwith his followers.

Al-Nu↪manı, by contrast, does not include this tradition in his work,nor does he cite any other traditions dealing with the question of themissing Imam’s effectivity as God’s proof (h. ujja). His only direct ref-erence to the issue is a mention of the standard answer cited above.However, the various traditions he does bring, combined with his com-mentary, come together to form a picture far less optimistic than IbnBabuya’s sunlight through clouds. For al-Nu↪manı, the greatest happi-ness for the Shı↪ı faithful, their ultimate reward, is to dwell continuouslyin nearness with the chosen “people of the house” (ahl al-bayt), who serveas intermediaries between God and His creation (al-sufara↩ baynahu wa-bayna khalqihi wa-’l-h. ujja ↪ala bariyyatihi). Al-Nu↪manı actually closeshis introduction to Kitab al-ghayba with a prayer for such perpetualcloseness, which can be achieved wholly only in the World to Come.162

Within the context of this longed-for ideal, al-Nu↪manı’s key image forthe present reality of Occultation and distance is that of darkness: theShı↪ı faithful are described as existing in a state of obscurity as black asnight, unbroken by any light but the glimmering future at the end of thetunnel; light will return only with the appearance of the Imam, whichis compared to the passing of a meteorite, or to the rising of the sun.163

Al-Nu↪manı describes the severance of the Imam from his community in

content of his Kamal al-dın. See section 1 above.161Kamal al-dın, p. 207, n. 22 in comparison with p. 253, n. 3. See also A.A.

Sachedina, Islamic Messianism, p. 105; Amir-Moezzi, The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam,pp. 423, 459 (the author provides an interpretation of this tradition in light of the“individual-internal dimension” of the ghayba).162Kitab al-ghayba, p. 32.163Ibid., pp. 149–151, n. 6–8.


the bleakest terms. The Occultation is a period of gloom, in which theworld feels its way blindly.164 It is a period of uncertainty and hope-lessness, in which doubt eats away at the hearts of the believers, whomust face the Imam’s prolonged absence and the fear that he is dead, hisbones already decaying in the earth.165 It is a time when many believersleave the path of faith, and tell each other that God’s proof is lost, andthe imamate has been annulled (wa-ghala al-nas fı dınihim wa-ajma↪u↪ala anna al-h. ujja dhahiba wa-’l-imama bat.ila).166

The severance implied by the Occultation means that that Imam can-not act as a guide to the faithful — that he cannot fulfill an essential partof his role as God’s proof (h. ujja). This leaves his followers vulnerable tothe possibility of losing their way. Shı↪ı tradition describes this dangerthrough the powerful image of a drowning man calling desperately forhelp, with no sign of a rescuer on the horizon.167 The solution that thetraditional Shı↪ı writers offer is fundamentally different from that of theScholastic school, mentioned above. They see the Shı↪a as returning toa default state approaching dormancy. Enjoined to passivity, the Shı↪ıfaithful can only cling with all their might to the traditions and guidancehanded down by previous imams, thus holding on and surviving until themoment when God will finally raise their star (i.e. the absent Imam) upagain for them (kunu ↪ala ma antum ↪alayhi h. atta yut.ali ↪u Allah lakumnajmakum).168

There is an interesting parallel to this idea in Judah Halevi’s thought.In the Kuzari IV, 7, the Rabbi compares Israel in Exile to the “near-sighted” (al-↪umsh) who feel their way in the gloom, unable to see thedivine light because of their distance from the place of prophecy. Theymust therefore follow closely in the footsteps of those who came beforethem, clinging to those “clear-sighted” from past ages, who were still ableto see the divine light while dwelling within the places of prophecy.169

For Halevi, the specific legal implications of this general theological tenetare not as clear-cut as the rules derived from the Shı↪ı traditions citedabove. This is because the traditional Shı↪ı writers were active in theperiod immediately following the end of the Shı↪ı institution of the Ima-

164Ibid., pp. 66, n. 5; 141, n. 2.165Ibid., p. 154, n. 12–14; Kamal al-dın, p. 326, n. 5.166Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 143–144, n. 3.167Ibid., p. 159, n. 4; Kamal al-dın p. 352, n. 49. See Levin, Jackals and violin, pp.

100–101 for a discussion of Judah Halevi’s use of a similar image in his poetry, wherehe describes the exiled Israel as drowning.168Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 159, n. 6; Kamal al-dın, p. 349, n. 41 and more generally:

Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 158–160, n. 2–8; Kamal al-dın, pp. 347–351, n. 38–40, 44, 47.See also: W. Madelung, Religious schools and sects in medieval Islam, art. X for ageneral survey of this crucial issue in Imamı-Shı↪ism.169Kuzari IV, 7: p. 248, ll. 15–22.

292 Ehud Krinis

mate, before the Shı↪ı scholars (↪ulama↩) had formulated a consistentlegal approach and become widely accepted. Halevi, in contrast, wrotein a context where the leadership and authority of the sages and mastersof halakha had been long established. Despite these important differ-ences, Halevi’s complex argument about this subject is very similar inundertone to that of the traditional Imamı Shı↪ı school. The Jews inExile, like the Shı↪a during the Occultation, are nurtured by the rem-nants of an earlier period of divine revelation.170 Religious guidanceand actual day-to-day codes of conduct all rest on earlier authorities.In the Jewish context, this authoritative early era is the period whenIsrael dwelt in its own land, receiving divine guidance through prophecy(nubuwwa, wah. y) during the days of the Tabernacle and the First Tem-ple, and “illumination” or “inspiration” (ta↩yıd, ilham) in the time of theSecond Temple;171 a time when they were shepherded by the institutionsof divine order, by the prophets, priests, judges, and Sanhedrin.172 Inthe Shı↪ı context, the authoritative period is that of the open existenceof the institutions of prophecy and Imamate, when the Shı↪a were guideddirectly by the contemporaneous h. ujja.173

There is a deeper theological aspect to this shared idea of a defaultperiod of dormancy. Exile and Occultation reduce not only the believers

170See the Rabbi’s reference to the “remnants of divine Law” (baqaya al-sharı↪a),Kuzari II, 64: p. 122, l.17, as well as III, 1: pp. 140, l. 17–142, l. 3.171See in this context Efros, Studies in medieval Jewish philosophy, pp. 148–150;

Lasker, “Arabic philosophical terms in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari,” pp. 162–163; Lobel,Between mysticism and philosophy, pp. 120–135.172See mainly the convoluted argument in Kuzari III, 39–41 (pp. 188 l. 15–192, l.

28), which is part of the work’s anti-Karaite polemic section. See also Arieli, “RabbiJudah Halevi and Halakha,” pp. 46–47.173In this context it should be taken into account that the central Muslim princi-

ple regarding Muh. ammad as the last prophet, “the Seal of the Prophets,” (khatamal-nabbiyyın) was gradually accepted by the Imamı Shı↪a camp, thus as far as it isconcerned (similarly to the Sunnıs), no new prophet bearing new revelations andguidance is to be expected. In al-Nu↪manı’s book, the signs of the early Shı↪a’s ide-ological tension between the utopian messianic view, which attributes to the HiddenImam with the role of a prophet bringing a new book of divine revelation and divinelaw (sunna) as part of his mission (Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 169, n. 10; 195, n. 1; 233.n. 19; 255, n. 13; 262–263, n. 22; 281, n. 76; 319. n. 6; 321, n. 1), and a restorativemessianic view, which gives the Shı↪ı qa↩im the role of renewer and completer of theProphet of Islam’s mission (ibid., pp. 183, 230–232, nos. 13, 17; 238–239, no. 30;321–322, nos. 1, 5), may still be seen. Ibn Babuya, for his part, is already inclinedto blur and erase the Shı↪ı traditions that tend to a utopian messianic view of theqa↩im’s mission, in favour of emphasizing the restorative aspect of this mission (seeespecially: Kamal al-dın, p. 326, no. 3). For the differentiation between utopianmessianism and restorative messianism in Jewish thought, see G. Scholem, The Mes-sianic idea in Judaism, pp. 1–36. On the tension between the idea of the sealing ofprophecy and the possibility of its continuation in Islamic history, see Y. Friedmann,Prophecy continuous.


to a default position, but also God Himself: His connection to the worldbecomes limited, and He is less present within history. We come to thefinal shared point in this comparative study of the Kuzari ’s distinctiveline of thought, and the unique internal logic of early Imamı Shı↪ı the-ology. For Judah Halevi, Exile is a period that lacks all the open signsattesting to God’s presence as the “Living God” (the Land, the Templeand its vessels, the indwelling of the Shekhinah, prophecy and miracles).The only tangible trace that is left of God’s presence within history isthe fact of survival, the continued existence of Israel throughout all thepermutations and hardships of the exilic period. This is the one and onlyperceptible phenomenon that still attests to the uniqueness of the chosenpeople. The endurance of Israel in exilic conditions, the likes of whichhave not been withstood by other nations, is what originally draws theattention of the King of the Khazars, and is defined both by him andby the Rabbi as a “secret” (sirr).174 This secret, connected as it is tothe imperishable, indestructible element of the nation of Israel,175 canbe unraveled by the theological idea of the essential interdependence ofthe chosen “Living Community” and the historical presence of God as“the Living God.”

As previously mentioned, Shı↪ı theology postulates a similar neces-sary interdependence between the presence of God in the world, and theexistence of God’s Chosen as God’s proofs (h. ujaj Allah).176 The openpresence of the Chosen of God as God’s proof is what creates the envi-ronment for the manifestation of divinity within the world. In periodswhen God’s proof ceases to be openly present, when he is in a stateof Occultation, the continued survival of the missing Imam becomesthe only significant proof of the presence of God in human history. Inother words, early Shı↪ı theology takes the Imam’s continued existencethroughout the period of the Occultation as the only testament (h. ujja)to God’s continued support of His faithful: it is the last refuge in whichGod can be present within history, if only in a secret, hidden manner.177

Though Israel’s survival in Exile — unlike the continued presence ofthe Imam in Occultation — is an openly acknowledged historical phe-nomenon, it is still a period when God is in hiding, when the explicitexpressions of God’s presence no longer accompany the Chosen People.

174Kuzari III, 10: p. 150, ll. 21–22 in comparison with II, 33: p. 102, ll. 3–7; IV, 23:p. 264, l. 23 ff.175See in this context the Rabbi’s speech concerning Israel’s ability to survive in ex-

ile, even if only a single individual emerges as the “worm of Jacob” (tola↪at Ya↪aqov),Kuzari III, 11: p. 160, ll. 27–28.176See Kitab al-ghayba, pp. 136–139, n. 1–11; Kamal al-dın, pp. 201–204, n. 1–15.177See M.J. Mcdermott, The theology of al-Shaıkh al-Mufıd, pp. 128, 130–131; S.A.

Arjomand, “The consolation of theology,” pp. 555, 558.

294 Ehud Krinis

For Halevi, as for the early Shı↪ı writers, survival itself comes to functionas the last, necessary, default sign of the presence of God within history,allowing for His continued manifestation. The God of History has beenexpressed via Israel’s exceptional history, a history so different from thatof other nations that it constitutes in and of itself proof of God’s uniqueconnection with His chosen people. In Exile, this connection can nolonger be expressed by means of the exceptional phenomena — mira-cles, prophecy — that characterized Israel’s past. Instead, during theinterim period of Exile, the miraculous survival of Israel itself becomesthe only remaining exceptional phenomenon, testifying to the differenceof Jewish history, and so the Jewish people. The secret of the necessarysurvival of the missing Imam throughout the period of the Occultation,and the secret allowing for the survival of Israel throughout Exile, can beexplained as springing from a shared line of theological thought: the ideaof mutual interdependence, and its intertwined assumption of a defaultpresence of God.178

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Bih. ar al-anwar =Al-Majlisı, Muh. ammad Baqir. Bih. ar al-anwar. 110 vols. Beirut,1983.

Ithbat al-was. iyya =Al-Mas↪udı, ↪Alı b. al-H. usayn (attrib.) Ithbat al-was. iyya li-’l-Imam↪Alı b. Abı T. alib. Beirut, 1988.

Kamal al-dın =Ibn Babuya (Babawayh[i]), Muh. ammad b. ↪Alı. Kamal al-dın wa-itmam al-ni ↪ma fı ithbat al-ghayba wa-kashf al-h. ayra. ↪Alı Akbaral-Ghaffarı, ed. Tehran, 1970.

Kitab al-ghayba =Al-Nu↪manı, Muh. ammad b. Ibrahım. Kitab al-ghayba. ↪Alı Akbaral-Ghaffarı, ed. Tehran, 1977.

178For more on the definition of the continued connection between the Imam andhis community during the time of the Occultation as “a divine secret,” see: Kamalal-dın, pp. 253, n. 3; 287–288, n. 7; 330, n. 15, as well as A.A. Sachedina, IslamicMessianism, p. 104.


Kuzari =Ha-Levi, Yehudah. Kitab al-radd wa-al-dalıl fı al-dın al-dhalıl (al-Kitab al-Khazarı). David Z. Baneth and H. aggai Ben-Shammai,eds. Jerusalem, 1977.

Rasa↩il ikhwan al-s.afa↩. But.rus Bustanı, ed. 4 vols., Beirut, 1957. Epis-tles of the Brethren of Purity: the case of the animals versus manbefore the king of the jin : An Arabic critical edition and Englishtranslation of Epistle 22. L. E. Goodman and R. McGregor, eds.and trans. Oxford, 2009.

Shirei HaKodesh =Ha-Levi, Yehudah. Shirei HaKodesh le-Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi(The Liturgical Poetry of Judah Halevi). Dov Yarden, ed. 4 vols.Jerusalem, 1978–1982.

Shirim =Ha-Levi, Yehudah. Shirim (An Anthology of Judah Halevi’s Po-etry). Israel Levin, ed. Tel-Aviv, 2007.

Al-T. usı, Kitab al-ghayba =Al-T. usı, Muh. ammad b. al-H. asan. Kitab al-ghayba. ↪Abdallah al-T. ihranı and ↪Alı Ah.mad al-Nas.ih. , eds. Qumm, 1991.

Us.ul al-kafı =Al-Kulaynı, Muh. ammad b. Ya↪qub. Us.ul al-kafı. ↪Alı Akbar al-Ghaffarı, ed. 2 vols. Tehran, 1958.

Secondary sources

Altmann, A. “Judah Halevi’s theory of climates.” Aleph 5 (2005): 215–246 (first published in Hebrew in Melilah 1 [1944]).

Amir-Moezzi, M.A. “Cosmogony and cosmology: in Twelver Shi↪ism.”EIr, s.v.

——. “Eschatology in Imamı Shı↪ism.” EIr, s.v.

——. The divine guide in early Shi ↪ism: the sources of esotericism inIslam. Albany, 1994.

——. The spirituality of Shi ↪i Islam: beliefs and practices. London,2011.

Arieli, N. “Rabbi Judah Halevi and Halakha.” Da↪at 1 (1978): 43–52(Hebrew).

296 Ehud Krinis

Arjomand, S.A. “Gayba.” EIr, s.v.

——. “Imam Absconditus and the beginnings of a theology of occul-tation: Imamı Shı↪ism circa 280–90 A.H/900 A.D.” Journal of theAmerican Oriental Society 117/ 1 (1997): 1–12.

——. “The consolation of theology: absence of the Imam and the tran-sition from Chiliasm to law in Shi↪ism.” The Journal of Religion76/4 (October 1996): 548–571.

——. “The crisis of the Imamate and the institution of occultation inTwelver Shi↪ism: a sociohistorical perspective.” In E. Kohlberg,ed. Shı↪ism. Aldershot, 2003, pp. 109–133. Previously printed in:International Journal of Middle East Studies 28/4 (1996): 491–515.

Bacher, W. “Ein unbekanntes Werk Moses Ibn Esras.” Monatsschriftfur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 51 (1907): 343–349.

Baer, J.F. Galut. New York, 1947.

Bar-Asher, M.M. “On Judaism and the Jews in early Shı↪ı religiousliterature.” Pe↪amim — Studies in Oriental Jewry 61 (1994): 16–36 (Hebrew).

——. Scripture and exegesis in early Imamı Shi ↪ism. Leiden, 1999.

Ben-Sasson, H.H. “Galut.” In idem. Continuity and variety. Tel-Aviv, 1984, pp. 113–155 (Hebrew). Abridged English translation:Encyclopaedia Judaica2, “Galut,” s.v.

Clarke, L. “The rise and decline of taqiyya in Twelver Shı↪ism.” In T.Lawson, ed. Reason and inspiration in Islam. London, 2005, pp.46–63.

Cook, D. Studies in Muslim apocalyptic. Princeton, 2002.

Davidson, H. “The active intellect in the Cuzari and Halevi’s theory ofcausality.” Revue des Etudes Juives 131 (1972): 351–396.

Efros, I. Studies in medieval Jewish philosophy. New York, 1974.

Friedmann, Y. Prophecy continuous: aspects of Ahmadi religious thoughtand its medieval background. Berkeley, 1989.

Fyzee, A.A.A. “Ibn Babawayh[i].” EI2, s.v.


Goldziher, I. “Schi↪itsches.” Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandi-schen Gesellschaft 64 (1910): 529–534.

Hodgson, M.G.S. “How did the early Shi↪a become sectarian?” Journalof the American Oriental Society 75 (1955): 1–13.

——. “H. udjdja.” EI2, s.v.

Klemm, V. “The four sufara↩ of the Twelfth Imam: on the formativeperiod of the Twelver Shı↪a.” In Etan Kohlberg, ed. Shı↪ism.Aldershot, 2003, pp. 135–152.

Kohlberg, E. “Early attestations of the term Ithna-↪ashariyya.” Jeru-salem Studies in Arabic and Islam 24 (2000): 343–357.

——. “From Imamiyya to Ithna-↪ashariyya.” Bulletin of the School ofOriental and African Studies 39 (1976): 521–534.

——. “Imam and community in the pre-Ghayba period.” In S.A.Arjomand, ed. Authority and political culture in Shı↪ism. Albany,1988, pp. 25–53.

——. “In praise of the few.” In M.G.A. Hawting, J.A. Mojaddedi andA. Samely, eds. Studies in Islamic and Middle Eastern texts andtraditions. Oxford, 2000, pp. 149–162.

——. “Shı↪ı h. adıth.” In A.F.L. Beerson, T.M. Johnstone, R.B. Serjeantand G.R. Smith, eds. Arabic literature to the end of the Umayyadperiod. Cambridge, 1983, pp. 299–307.

——. “Some Shı↪ı views of the antediluvian world.” Studia Islamica 52(1980): 41–66.

——. “Taqiyya in Shı↪ı theology and religion.” In H.G. Kippenbergand G.G. Stroumsa, eds. Secrecy and concealment. Leiden, 1995,pp. 345–380.

Krinis, E. The idea of the chosen people in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari andits origins in the Shı ↪ı Imam doctrine. Dissertation, Ben-GurionUniversity, 2008 (Hebrew).

——. “The legitimist inheritance question and the formation of the cho-sen people idea in Judah Halevi’s Sefer HaKuzari.” In H. Kreisel,B. Huss and U. Ehrlich, eds. Spiritual authority: struggles overcultural power in Jewish thought. Beer-Sheva, 2009, pp. 47–70(Hebrew).

298 Ehud Krinis

Krinis, E. “The Arabic Background of the Kuzari.” The Journal ofJewish Thought and Philosophy 21.1 (2013): 1–56.

Lalani, A.R. Early Shı ↪ı thought: the teachings of Imam Muhammadal-Baqir. London, 2000.

Lasker, D.J. “Arabic philosophical terms in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari.” InJ. Blau and D. Doron, eds. Heritage and innovation in medievalJudaeo-Arabic culture. Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of theSociety for Judaeo-Arabic Studies. Ramat Gan, 2000, pp. 161–166(Hebrew).

——. “Judah Halevi on eschatology and Messianism.” In B.H. HaryBenjamin and H. Ben-Shammai, eds. Esoteric and exoteric aspectsin Judeo-Arabic culture, Leiden, 2006, pp. 85–106.

——. “Proselyte Judaism, Christianity and Islam in the thought ofJudah Halevi.” The Jewish Quarterly Review 81/1–2 (1990): 75–91.

Levin, I. Jackals and violin: destruction, exile, vengeance and redemp-tion in the Hebrew national poetry. Tel Aviv, 1998 (Hebrew).

Lobel, D. Between mysticism and philosophy: Sufi language and reli-gious experience in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari. New York, 2000.

Madelung, W. “Imama.” EI2, s.v.

——. “Imamism and Mu↪tazilite theology.” In T. Fahd, ed. LeShı↪isme Imamite. Paris, 1970, pp. 13–29.

——. Religious schools and sects in medieval Islam. London, 1985.

——. “Shı↪a.” EI2, s.v.

Mcdermott, M.J. “Ebn Babawayh.” EIr, s.v.

——. The theology of al-Shaıkh al-Mufıd (d. 413/1022). Beirut, 1978.

Modarressi, H. Crisis and consolidation in the formative period of Shı-↪ite Islam. Princeton, 1993.

——. “Rationalism and traditionalism in Shı↪ı jurisprudence: a prelim-inary survey.” Studia Islamica 59 (1984): 141–158.

——. Tradition and survival: a bibliographical survey of early Shı↪iteliterature. Vol. 1, Oxford, 2003.


Momen, M. An introduction to Shı ↪ı Islam: the history and doctrinesof Twelver Shı↪ism. New Haven, 1985.

Newman, A.J. “Between Qumm and the West: the occultation accord-ing to al-Kulaynı and al-Katib al-Nu↪manı.” In F. Daftary andJ.W. Meri, eds. Culture and memory in medieval Islam. London,2003, pp. 94–108.

Pines, S. “Shı↪ite terms and conceptions in Judah Halevi’s Kuzari.”Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 2 (1980): 165–251.

Rubin, U. “Pre-existence and light: aspects of the concept of NurMuh.ammad.” Israel Oriental Studies 5 (1975): 62–119.

Sachedina, A.A. Islamic Messianism- The Idea of the Mahdi in TwelverShi ↪ism. Albany, 1981.

Saenz-Badillos A. and Lasker D.J. “Judah Halevi.” EncyclopaediaJudaica2, s.v.

Scheindlin, R.P. The song of the distant dove —Judah Halevi’s pilgrim-age. Oxford, 2008.

Schirmann, J.H. The history of Hebrew poetry in Muslim Spain. Edited,supplemented and annotated by Ezra Fleischer, Jerusalem, 1996(Hebrew).

Scholem, G. The Messianic idea in Judaism. New York, 1971.

Sharon, M. “Ahl al-Bayt — People of the House.” Jerusalem Studiesin Arabic and Islam 8 (1986): 169–184.

Silman, Y. Philosopher and Prophet: Judah Halevi, the Kuzari, and thedevelopment of his thought. Albany, 1995.

Stern, S.M. and Walzer S. Three unknown Buddhist stories in an Arabicversion. Oxford, 1971.

Yahalom, J. “The immigration of Rabbi Judah Halevi to Eretz Israelin vision and riddle.” Shalem — Studies in the History of the Jewsin Eretz Israel 7 (2001): 33–45 (Hebrew).

Zeligman, Y.A. “Galut.” Encyclopedia Biblica, s.v.

E. Krinis, "Galut and Ghayba: the exile of Israel and the occultation of the Shi'i Imam-Messiah. A...

Documents

Transcript of E. Krinis, "Galut and Ghayba: the exile of Israel and the occultation of the Shi'i Imam-Messiah. A...