I am not seeing anything new about Mukhtar al Taqafi. The same information about him is propagated in many academic books.
The following two books have the exact same narrative about Mukhtar
[1] Jafri, S.H Mohammad. "The Origin and Early Development of Shi'a Islam,”, Oxford University Press, 2002
[2] Farhad Daftary. The Isma'ilis: Their History and Doctrines. 2007
Mukhtar is portrayed as a controversial military commander who gathered the Kufian Shia to avenge the massacre at Karbala. Since he couldn't garner the support of the 4th Shia Imam, he went towards another son of Ali, Muhammad ibn Hanafiyah, and promoted his Imamah.
The author Ibn Tahir al-Baghdadi incorrectly portrays Mukhtar as a cult leader for the Kaysaniyya sect.
From a few confessions from the follower of the Kaysanite sect, link #1, link #2, You can hardly find Mukhtar being referred to by name in any of the narrations. It almost seems that whatever Mukhtar did to avenge the death of the Grandson of the Prophet, Hussain ibn Ali, had no relevance to the doctrine of the Kaysanniya sect. The people from the Kaysanite sect believed in what ever they wanted to believe. We came across a few narrations from Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) where the sect members were not even aware of what Ibn Hanafiyah stood for.
There is still a missing link between Mukhtar and the doctrine of the Kaysaniyyah sect.
As-salam `alaykum,
ReplyDeleteRead this in regards to al-Mukhtar at-Thaqafi. This is from Rijal al-Kashshi:
http://www.tashayyu.org/rijal/rijal-al-kashshi/al-mukhtar-b-abi-ubayda
"
And al-Mukhtar is the one who called the people to Muhammad b. `Ali b. Abi Talib, Ibn al-Hanafiyya. And they were called the Kaysaniyya, and they are the Mukhtariyya. He had the laqab of Kaysan. And the chief of his police, who had the kunya of Abu `Amra, had the laqab of Kaysan, and his name was Kaysan. And it is said that he was named Kaysan by Kaysan the client of `Ali b. Abi Talib عليه السلام, and he was the one who charged him with seeking (revenge for) the blood of al-Husayn عليه السلام, and he showed him his killers. And he was the companion of his secret and the dominant over his affair. And he would not be informed about a man from the enemies of al-Husayn عليه السلام that he was in a home or in a place but that he would seek him out with and destroy his home with his household and kill everyone who was alive in it. And every ruined home in Kufa was from what he destroyed. The people of Kufa have struck a saying for it, so when a person becomes impoverished they say: Abu `Amra entered his house. Even the poet has said in regards to him:
Iblis with what he is in is better than Abu `Amra *** He tempts you and tyrannizes you but his breakage does not tyrannize you"
Moreover, I would recommend also reading Al-Nawabakhti's Firaq al-Shi'a
Walaykum salam
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment. You've got something interesting here. I wonder how different the belief of the followers of Mukhtar (Mukhtarriya) was vs the Kaysanite doctrine. I'll keep your note in mind for future post.