What is Qiyama?

[HumptyDumpty]

In this post by @John7755 يوحنا:

He created a small vanguard of followers who believed that he was a divine being of sorts and he began a mission of rebellion. Fixing himself in an old Sassanid fort, he began to seek out warriors and supplies for his grand vision. Using the poor condition and decentralization of slaves in southern Iraq, he began to manipulate leaders of slave groups (slaves were divided into bands who served in the fields, each band with a slave who received privileges and hence got to command other slaves on behalf of the masters) into rebellion and submission to him as a divine being. Additionally, he rose flags proclaiming the destruction of the Abbasid who were according to him slayers of the Alid and the Holy Household. According to records we have, his movement burned Qurans, attacked Islamic figures where possible and promoted a radical Shi'a belief with him at the top of the religion with an implicit Qiyama upheld (as in the abolition of Islamic laws). His loyal clique of followers at the top were devout and thousands of his new freedmen were fanatically loyal to him as the 'Shumay' and Divine Prophet.

I was under the impression that qiyama was a part of the Day of Judgement which caused the resurrection of the dead. I wasn't aware of qiyama referring to abolition of Islamic laws. Is there more information on this available and some sects which conform to this idea? The closest I can think of are the Khurramiyya.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Once the Qiyama occurs in Islamic eschatology, the need for the adherence to the Sharia is no longer necessary as the Islamic body populace will no longer be united by laws and regulations given by Allah through his Prophets, but through direct 'edict' of sorts. All the Muslim would do from thence onward is the submission and attendance to the Mahdi initially and then to Allah Himself. Sharia is the law of Allah on this earth in separation, but once the Qiyama has occurred, those restrictions are abrogated according to Islamic thought, as indeed all things will be pure and all knowledge of the law will come directly from the source as opposed to legal opinion from Sharia.

Shi'a of the Twelver and Ismaili versions both adhere to the notion that Sharia is for when there is the absence of the Imamah within the plane of humanity. When there is Imamah and direct command by them, then there is no need for Sharia as you would follow the direct laws of the Imam. In the past, certain sects claimed that the Qiyama had started, most famously the following:

1. Alawites and other similar groups such as the Safavid Sufi movement (Syria, Azerbaijan, Zanjan hill country)
2. Qarmatians (Southern Syria, al-Haasa)
3. Nizari sect of Ismailism during the 13th century (Iran)
4. Other radical movements and rebellions of the Shi'ite variety in the Middle Ages such as the Zanj rebellion.

@HumptyDumpty

 

[HumptyDumpty]

Once the Qiyama occurs in Islamic eschatology, the need for the adherence to the Sharia is no longer necessary as the Islamic body populace will no longer be united by laws and regulations given by Allah through his Prophets, but through direct 'edict' of sorts. All the Muslim would do from thence onward is the submission and attendance to the Mahdi initially and then to Allah Himself. Sharia is the law of Allah on this earth in separation, but once the Qiyama has occurred, those restrictions are abrogated according to Islamic thought, as indeed all things will be pure and all knowledge of the law will come directly from the source as opposed to legal opinion from Sharia.

Shi'a of the Twelver and Ismaili versions both adhere to the notion that Sharia is for when there is the absence of the Imamah within the plane of humanity. When there is Imamah and direct command by them, then there is no need for Sharia as you would follow the direct laws of the Imam. In the past, certain sects claimed that the Qiyama had started, most famously the following:

1. Alawites and other similar groups such as the Safavid Sufi movement (Syria, Azerbaijan, Zanjan hill country)
2. Qarmatians (Southern Syria, al-Haasa)
3. Nizari sect of Ismailism during the 13th century (Iran)
4. Other radical movements and rebellions of the Shi'ite variety in the Middle Ages such as the Zanj rebellion.

@HumptyDumpty

Do Sunni Muslims or Khawarij have a similar concept? This reminds me of the Christian Adamites who held similarly antinomian beliefs.

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

Do Sunni Muslims or Khawarij have a similar concept? This reminds me of the Christian Adamites who held similarly antinomian beliefs.

No. There has been no example of a Sunni Qiyama except in an implicit sense with the Mughal empire asserting what amounted to a Qiyama. During the 16th and 17th century, we see readings at a Qiyama in the Mughal and Ottoman Empire but never fully enacted. Khawarij tended to avoid top down methods of governance when they existed and sharia prescriptions were sacrosanct to them, like with Mu’Tazilah, they believed that laws were pre-existing matters that are true regardless of the Qiyama. In other words, humans will adhere to sharia in the afterlife. Oddly, Mutazilah and Khawarij hold that the Quran and hence laws are creations yet say that these laws are thence adhered to eternally afterwards. Sort of the opposite of how most Sunni scholars view it.

Also this differs from Adamite views in that the Qiyama simply means that the law is issued by edict from an infallible leader as opposed to a large legal codex as with Sharia. Thus, morals still apply, they just are based upon the infallible wisdom and genius of the Imam. This is the current status of the Alawites who have already ‘held’ a Qiyama, same with all the other sects mentioned. Likewise, the system is very similar to the Papacy in catholic Christendom.

 

[HumptyDumpty]

Oddly, Mutazilah and Khawarij hold that the Quran and hence laws are creations yet say that these laws are thence adhered to eternally afterwards. Sort of the opposite of how most Sunni scholars view it.

That sounds contradictory. Isn’t the implication of the Qur’an and it’s laws being creations that the laws can be changed or are unnecessary?

Furthermore, how did the Khawarij become so associated with deviancy when they appear to be more stringent than ISIS or the Taliban? There doesn’t seem to be room for crime or sin if you are Khawarij.

Likewise, the system is very similar to the Papacy in catholic Christendom.

Isn’t Twelver Shi’a Islam also like this? Especially modern Shi’a Islam. If I remember correctly, Khomeini legalized gender transition and trans-sexuality in Shi’a Islam. That would not be possible if they were abiding by the Shari’a right?

No. There has been no example of a Sunni Qiyama except in an implicit sense with the Mughal empire asserting what amounted to a Qiyama. During the 16th and 17th century, we see readings at a Qiyama in the Mughal and Ottoman Empire but never fully enacted.

What? Do you have more information?

 

[John7755 يوحنا]

What? Do you have more information?

The Ottoman Empire in the 16th and early 17th century asserted the notion that the Padishah was the 'World Pole' and was a 'Saintly King' with a special status as the ruler of the whole world, both materially and spiritually. Within the Sufi mystical understanding, this was an eventuality leading to the Mahdi and hence the Qiyyama when Islamic law is abrogated in favor of the edict directly from Allah and all things are purified. The classical Mughals until Aurangzeb also enacted this but went steps further by revoking Sharia law and permitting all manner of vice without the caveat that these are sinful. Even so, the Din-i Allahi is a sort of Qiyama-esque religious view of the world when placed in the Islamic historiology.

sn’t Twelver Shi’a Islam also like this? Especially modern Shi’a Islam. If I remember correctly, Khomeini legalized gender transition and trans-sexuality in Shi’a Islam. That would not be possible if they were abiding by the Shari’a right?

Not necessarily, Twelver Shi'a traditionally approved of various 3rd genders in the Middle Ages or those who identified as other than their birth sex; however these people were marginalized communities. As far as the Qiyama, this is different; the Ayatollah or Shaykhs have no infallible authority within Twelver Islam, but instead have legal opinions that can be agreed with or disagreed with.

That sounds contradictory. Isn’t the implication of the Qur’an and it’s laws being creations that the laws can be changed or are unnecessary?

Furthermore, how did the Khawarij become so associated with deviancy when they appear to be more stringent than ISIS or the Taliban? There doesn’t seem to be room for crime or sin if you are Khawarij.

Maybe this is a more philosophical point that I do not want to engage with at the moment.

Stringency does not imply orthodoxy however. The Khawarij are too stringent and are noted by their rapidity to make takfir for minor sins and to deny apparent vs esoteric Imanah. In otherwords, they believe that minor sins can lead one to hellfire and that based on apparent situations or matters of action, one can ascertain a full understanding of the person's faith. Traditionally, Sunni Islam requires several checks before takfir can be made that nullifies one's Islam.

 

[HumptyDumpty]

The Ottoman Empire in the 16th and early 17th century asserted the notion that the Padishah was the 'World Pole' and was a 'Saintly King' with a special status as the ruler of the whole world, both materially and spiritually.

Isn’t this like the temporal qutb?

Not necessarily, Twelver Shi'a traditionally approved of various 3rd genders in the Middle Ages or those who identified as other than their birth sex

That’s very interesting! Can you provide more info on this?

Maybe this is a more philosophical point that I do not want to engage with at the moment.

That’s fine. Did anyone historically come to that conclusion, abolishing Islamic law as a product of the Qur’ans createdness?

Stringency does not imply orthodoxy however. The Khawarij are too stringent and are noted by their rapidity to make takfir for minor sins and to deny apparent vs esoteric Imanah.

Yes but look at who tended to be Khawarij historically. It was criminals, slavers, revolutionaries, etc. such people commit major not just minor sins. What was the point of compatibility between such people and stringency? It was that a lie told by their opponents?