The Second-Century Šīʿite Ġulāt: Were They Really Gnostic?

Tamima Bayhom-Daou

doi:10.5617/jais.4571

Abstract

This paper questions the suggestion of our sources that gnostic currents had already appeared among Šīʿites by the early second/eighth century. It contends that gnosticism did not surface in Šīʿism until the third/ninth century and that our information on its existence among second-century Šīʿites is the result of retrospective ascription to groups and individuals who, on account of their (real or alleged) messianic beliefs, had already been identified by moderate Imāmīs as ġulāt. That information would have served to distance Imāmism and its imāms from gnostic teachings by associating those teachings with repudiated figures from the past. The paper examines evidence showing that in his work on firaq Hišām b. al-Ḥakam (d. 179/795) was not aware of the existence of gnostic ideas in Šīʿism. Other examined evidence also shows that references to gnostic ġuluww are conspicuous by their absence from sources on Šīʿism that are datable to before the third/ ninth century.

Highlights

This paper questions the suggestion of our sources that gnostic currents had already appeared among Šīôites by the early second/eighth century.∗ It contends that gnosticism did not surface in Šīôism until the third/ninth century and that our information on its existence among second-century Šīôites is the result of retrospective ascription to groups and individuals who, on account of their messianic beliefs, had already been identified by moderate Imāmīs as ġulāt
Gnosticism is the term given by modern scholarship to a religious and philosophical movement that emerged in the Near East in the first century A.D. within the Judeo-Christian tradition
The basic principle of gnosticism is that the material world is evil, created by a demiurge who is subordinate to the supreme God and creator of the spiritual sphere or sphere of light—the pleroma

Summary

THE GNOSTIC ĠULĀT

Most of the Šīôite ġulāt (extremists or, literally, exaggerators) of our Muslim sources have concepts and beliefs ascribed to them that have close parallels in the gnosticism of late antiquity.[6]. Regarding the nature of their imām, the ġulāt are said to have believed that he was an incarnation of the divine spirit or light, a prophet, an apostle, or an angelic being. Some said he was a demiurge or a lesser god (ilāh al-ar−d) who was responsible for the creation of the world.[13] One of the most recurring themes in descriptions of the ġulāt concerns their (real or supposed) antinomianism and libertinism (ibā−ha). 15 For example, Nawba›htī, Firaq, 25, 30, 34, 38–41

MESSIANISM AND THE ĠULĀT

THE SOURCES AND THE QUESTION OF THEIR AUTHENTICITY

OTHER ARGUMENTS AGAINST HIŠĀM AS THE SOURCE OF SECTION G

OTHER EARLY SOURCES ON ŠĪôISM

Findings

ĠULUWW IN THE SECOND CENTURY