An important
Shi`i Muslim community, the Ismailis have had a complex history
dating to the formative period of Islam, when different communities of
interpretation were developing their doctrinal positions. In time, these
communities acquired specific designations and were generally classified
as Sunni or Shi`i, Islam’s two main divisions. From early on, the
Ismailis, who were dispersed throughout much of the Islamic world, from
North Africa to Central Asia and India, represented a multiplicity of
ethnic groups as well as social and cultural milieus; they also produced a
rich literary heritage in a variety of languages. On two occasions in the
course of their long and eventful history, the Ismailis established states
of their own, the Fatimid Caliphate (909-1171) and the Nizari Ismaili
state (1094-1256), also making important contributions to Islamic thought
and culture.
Until recently, the Ismailis were studied and evaluated almost
exclusively upon the basis of evidence collected or fabricated by their
many enemies, especially medieval Sunni polemicists and Christian
Crusaders. As a result, numerous myths and fanciful legends continued to
circulate throughout the centuries concerning Ismaili beliefs and
practices. Starting in the 1930s, however, with the recovery and study of
a large number of genuine Ismaili texts preserved in private collections
in many different regions of the world--especially Yemen, Syria, Central
Asia and the Indian subcontinent--Ismaili studies have witnessed a
dramatic breakthrough. This paper draws on the findings of modern
scholarship in the field to explore aspects of the religious life of the
Ismailis in their diverse historical and cultural contexts.
Ismaili relations with the other religious communities of the
Islamic world have often been characterized by extended periods of
‘conflict’ since they were frequently perceived and persecuted by
others as ‘heretics.’ Under such adverse circumstances, the Ismailis
have been obliged throughout much of their history to practice taqiyya,
or precautionary dissimulation, hiding their true religious beliefs or
adopting different external guises, including Sufi, Sunni, Twelver Shi`i,
or even Hindu ones, in order to safeguard themselves. This complex
phenomenon and its long-term consequences have not been the subject of any
particular investigation by modern scholars. Without a doubt, extended
dissimulating practices lasting several centuries may eventually lead to
irrevocable influences on the indigenous traditions of any dissimulating
community. In the case of the Ismailis, these influences have been
manifested in different forms, ranging from the total acculturation or
full assimilation of Ismailis into a dominant religious community or
tradition, which was originally chosen as a dissimulating cover in a
particular locality, to various degrees of ‘interfacing’ between
Ismaili and ‘other’ traditions without the actual loss of their
identity. Be that as it may, the Ismailis have stood the test of time and,
unlike numerous other religious minorities, they have succeeded in
retaining a communal cohesion and religious identity which transcends
national and cultural boundaries. Today, the Ismailis, who number several
million and belong mainly to the Nizari branch of Ismailism, are scattered
in more than twenty-five countries of Asia, Africa, Europe and North
America, and recognize HH Prince Karim Aga Khan as their forty-ninth
spiritual leader, or imam.
By the time of the Abbasid revolution in 750, Imami Shi`ism, the
common heritage of the major Shi`i communities of the Ithna`ashariyya (Twelvers)
and Isma`iliyya (Ismailis), had acquired special prominence under the
leadership of Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq. The Ismailis separated from the rest
of the Imami Shi`is on the death of Imam al-Sadiq in 765; by the middle of
the ninth century, they had organized a secret, revolutionary movement
designated as the da`wa, or mission. The overall aim of this religio-political
movement of social protest was to uproot the Abbasids and install the imam
recognized by the Ismailis to the actual rule of the Islamic umma,
or community.
The Ismailis retained their Imami theological heritage, especially
its doctrine of the Imamate. This doctrine, which has continued to occupy
a central position in Ismaili theology, was based upon a belief in the
permanent need of mankind for a divinely-guided, sinless and infallible (ma`sum)
imam to act as the authoritative
teacher and guide of men in all their spiritual affairs after the death of
the Prophet Muhammad. Indeed, this imam
was perceived as a charismatic leader possessing certain superhuman or
divinely-ordained attributes. Entitled to temporal leadership as much as
to religious authority, the imam’s
mandate did not, however, depend upon his actual rule over a state. The
doctrine, shared by the Ismailis and the Twelvers, further taught that the
Prophet, under divine guidance, had designated as his successor his cousin
and son-in-law, `Ali ibn Abi Talib (d. 661), who was married to
Muhammad’s daughter, Fatima; the Imamate was to be transmitted through
the progeny of `Ali and Fatima, `Alids belonging to the Prophet’s family
(ahl al-bayt), until the end of time. Thus, the Shi`is upheld the
sanctity of the Prophet’s family and found the charismata of inerrancy
and infallibility in `Ali and his descendants, the spiritual leaders to
whom their partisans were deeply attached for their salvation. The `Alid imam
was believed to possess a special knowledge, or `ilm,
and a perfect understanding of the exoteric (zahir)
and esoteric (batin) meanings of
the Qur’an as well as the commandments and prohibitions of the shari`a, or the sacred law of Islam. Indeed, recognition of this imam
and obedience to him were made the absolute duties of every believer.
However, the `Alid imams had been successively deprived of their legitimate rights by
the Umayyads and the Abbasids, under whose patronage the Sunni
interpretations of Islam were gradually elaborated by religious scholars,
and the Sunni `ulama’ viewed
Shi`i interpretations of Islam as tantamount to ilhad,
or deviations from the ‘right path.’ The stage was thus set for
seminal Sunni-Shi`i polemical discourses and religio-political hostilities
which have persisted until modern days. In time, the Shi`a themselves
split into different communities, each acknowledging a different line of `Alids
as their legitimate imams; the
Ismaili imams belonged to a particular line of `Alids.
The revolutionary message of the Ismaili da`wa
was systematically disseminated in different regions of the Islamic world
by a network of da`is, or
missionaries. The da`is summoned
Muslims everywhere to accord their allegiance to the Ismaili imam,
whose rights to the leadership of the Muslims had been hitherto usurped.
This imam was also expected to
deliver the believers from the oppressive rule of the Abbasids, establish
a more equitable social order in the world and guarantee salvation in the
afterlife for his followers. Capitalizing upon regional grievances as
well, the da`is targeted
different social strata across the Muslim world. The success of the early
Ismaili da`wa culminated in the establishment of the Fatimid Caliphate in
North Africa in 909. The Ismaili imam,
ruling as Fatimid caliph over an expanding empire, presented his Shi`i
challenge to Abbasid hegemony and Sunni interpretations of Islam. The
Fatimid caliph-imam could now
act as the spiritual spokesman of Shi`i Islam in general, much in the same
way that the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad was the representative of Sunni
Islam. Henceforth, the Ismailis were targeted for intensified polemical
attacks and persecutions outside of their state. But within Fatimid
dominions, the Ismailis were free for the first time in their history to
practice their faith openly under state protection.
In line with their universal aspirations, the Fatimid caliph-imams did not abandon their ambition to rule over the entire Muslim umma.
Consequently, after assuming power they retained their da`wa
organization, which remained active both within the Fatimid state and
outside of it. This organization, with its hierarchy of ranks, developed
over time, reaching its peak in the second half of the eleventh century.
But the success of the da`wa
within the Fatimid dominions was both limited and short-lived. The Ismaili
da`wa of Fatimid times found its lasting success outside of the
Fatimid domains, designated in the da`wa
terminology as jaza’ir (sing.,
jazira), meaning ‘islands’.
The success of the da`is was
greatest in regions already familiar with a diversity of Shi`i-- including
Ismaili--traditions, notably in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Persia and parts of
Central Asia. In Badakhshan and other areas of Central Asia, important
Ismaili communities appeared as a result of the activities of numerous
Fatimid da`is, notably Nasir Khusraw (d. after 1070), who is regarded by the
modern-day Ismailis of Tajikistan, Afghanistan and northern areas of
Pakistan as the founder of their communities. The da`wa achieved another of its lasting successes at the other
extremity of the Islamic world, in Yemen, where the Sulayhids recognized
Fatimid suzerainty and supervised the propagation of Ismailism in their
dominions. The Sulayhids also played a key role in the transmission of the
da`wa to Gujarat, in western
India. The Ismaili community founded in Gujarat in the second half of the
eleventh century by da`is sent
from Sulayhid Yemen grew into the present Bohra community of the Indian
subcontinent with its offshoot groups in East Africa and elsewhere.
The dispute over the succession to the Fatimid caliph-imam,
al-Mustansir, who died in 1094, permanently split the Ismaili community
into two rival factions, designated as Nizari and Musta`li after the sons
of al-Mustansir, both of whom claimed his heritage. Al-Musta`li, who
actually succeeded his father to the Fatimid Caliphate, was recognized as imam
by the central Ismaili da`wa
organization in Cairo and by the Ismailis of Egypt, Yemen and western
India, who depended upon the Fatimid regime. On the other hand, the
Ismailis of Persia and Iraq, situated in the midst of Saljuq dominions and
then under the leadership of Hasan Sabbah (d. 1124), acknowledged al-Mustansir’s
eldest surviving son and heir-designate, Nizar (d. 1095), as their next imam.
Ultimately, Hasan Sabbah broke off relations with Fatimid Cairo and
founded the independent Nizari Ismaili da`wa
on behalf of Nizar and his successors to the Imamate, who remained
inaccessible to their followers for several decades. Hasan Sabbah also
founded a state, centred at the fortress of Alamut, with scattered
territories in Persia and Syria, and a network of mountain strongholds.
By 1132, the Musta`li Ismailis had themselves split into two rival
factions which were later designated as Tayyibi and Hafizi. The Hafizi
Ismailis, who acknowledged the later Fatimid caliphs as their imams,
disappeared soon after the collapse of the Fatimid Caliphate in 1171,
while the Tayyibi Ismailis, who originally found their permanent base in
Yemen, survived the fall of the Fatimids. Tayyibi Ismailism is led by a
line of da`is, since its imams have remained in occultation. The seat of the movement was
transferred to India by the sixteenth century; subsequently, the community
subdivided into several groups. The dominant Tayyibi group, the Da’udi
Bohras, now number around 800,000 and still possess the authority of a da`i
headquartered in Bombay. In the remainder of this paper, our discussion
will relate solely to the Nizari Ismailis, who at present account for the
majoritarian Ismaili community and recognize the Aga Khan as their imam.
Hasan Sabbah, a remarkable organizer, designed a revolutionary
strategy for uprooting the Saljuq Turks, who had appeared in the Islamic
world as the new champions of Sunni ‘orthodoxy,’ by capitalizing upon
the ‘national’ sentiments of the Persians, who vehemently detested the
alien rule of the Turks. But Hasan Sabbah and his successors at Alamut did
not succeed in uprooting the Saljuqs; nor did the Saljuqs, despite their
greatly superior military capabilities, succeed in destroying the Nizari
Ismaili fortress communities. In time, a stalemate developed in
Ismaili-Saljuq relations that gradually eroded into ‘coexistence,’
with each side recognizing and accepting the other. By that time, Nizari imams,
claiming descent from Nizar, had emerged from occultation at Alamut and
the doctrine of the Imamate dictated that the community obey them
strictly. By 1210, when the Saljuqs had lost their pre-eminent position to
other powers, the Nizari imams even successfully attempted a daring rapprochement with Sunnism and the Abbasid establishment by ordering
the community to adopt the shari`a
in its Sunni form. This unprecedented command by the Nizari imam
was obeyed without any dissent by the Nizaris, who seemingly perceived it
as an application of taqiyya in
dangerous times.
The Nizari Ismailis maintained a sophisticated outlook and literary
tradition, despite their open armed revolt and military entanglements with
numerous surrounding powers. They elaborated their teachings in response
to changed circumstances, but from early on reaffirmed the old Shi`i
doctrine of the Imamate, or the necessity of authoritative guidance and
teaching (ta`lim) by a rightful and contemporary imam. Indeed, this emphasis upon the autonomous authority of the
current imam and his teachings,
independent of preceding imams,
has provided the distinguishing hallmark of Nizari Ismailism since Alamut
times, enabling the Nizari imams
to introduce new policies while continuing to provide spiritual leadership
for their community of followers.
The Mongols uprooted the Nizari Ismaili state in 1256. Alamut and
major Ismaili strongholds in Persia were demolished by the all-conquering
Mongols, who massacred a large portion of the Persian Ismaili community.
With these events, the Nizari Ismailis, now devoid of political
prominence, entered a new phase of their history. The first five centuries
after the fall of Alamut constitute the longest period of obscurity in
Ismaili history, for the Nizari Ismailis were henceforth obliged to live
clandestinely in Syria, Persia, Afghanistan, parts of Central Asia and
South Asia. For long periods, these communities did not have access to any
central da`wa organization nor
to their imams, who lived in
concealment in the aftermath of the Mongol invasions. Gradually, the
Nizari communities came under the authority of local leaders, designated
as da`is or pirs (the Persian equivalent of the Arabic shaykh), and elaborated a diversity of religious and literary
traditions independently of one another. With the exception of the Syrian
Nizaris, who were subjugated in the late thirteenth century by the Mamluks,
but permitted to remain in their strongholds, all Nizari communities were
now also obliged to observe various degrees of taqiyya.
In the wake of the Mongol massacres, many Persian Nizari Ismailis
migrated to Afghanistan, Central Asia and Sind, where Ismaili communities
already existed. Other Nizari groups, which found themselves isolated in
remote localities or in urban areas outside of their traditional
territories in Persia, soon either disintegrated or were assimilated into
the religiously dominant communities of their environment. The same fate
awaited many of those Nizari groups which practiced taqiyya
for extended periods to safeguard themselves against persecution by the
Mongol Ilkhanids, Timurids and other dynasties then ruling over Persia and
adjacent lands. Deeply rooted in their religious traditions and communal
practices, taqiyya was a measure adopted by different Nizari groups on their
own initiative in response to the exigencies of the time. Many Nizaris in
Khurasan (in eastern Persia) and in Afghanistan, where Sunnism prevailed,
probably disguised themselves as Sunnis, as all Persian Nizaris had done
during the late Alamut period.
It was during the early post-Alamut decades that the Persian
Nizaris, in the course of practicing taqiyya,
increasingly began to cloak themselves with the mantle of Sufism, without
actually establishing formal affiliations with any one of the Sufi orders,
or tariqas, which were then
spreading in Persia and Central Asia. This practice soon acquired wide
currency among the Nizaris of Persia, as well as those of Afghanistan and
Central Asia. (Historically, the Ismailis of Central Asia have mainly been
concentrated in Shughnan, Rushan and adjacent districts in Badakhshan, now
divided between Tajikistan and Afghanistan by the Oxus.) By the middle of
the fifteenth century, Ismaili-Sufi interactions had become
well-established in the Iranian world. The meagre literary production of
the Persian and Central Asian Nizaris of that period is permeated with
Sufi terms such as darwish (dervish), murid
(Sufi disciple) and murshid
(Sufi master), as well as ideas closely associated with the Sufi tradition
in Islam. Meanwhile, the Persian-speaking Nizaris had also adopted the
exterior aspects of the Sufi way of life; the Nizari imams,
who were still concealing their true identity, appeared to outsiders as
Sufi masters, shaykhs or pirs,
while their followers were known as murids.
Doubtless, the success of the Nizaris in dissimulating as Sufis would not
have been so readily possible if these two esoteric traditions in Islam
did not share common doctrinal grounds.
The Nizaris’ dissimulating practices in the guise of Sufism had a
lasting influence upon the Nizari community and its traditions. For
instance, the term pir came to
be generally used in reference to the imam
and high-ranking missionaries. The Nizaris still refer to themselves as
being the murids of their imams and the word tariqa
has been used in modern times as the official designation of the Nizari
Ismaili interpretation of Islam. The Nizaris of Persia, Afghanistan and
Central Asia, who belong to different cultural milieus, have also
continued to use verses originating with the great mystical poets of the
Iranian lands in their religious ceremonies, which bear close similarities
to Sufi dhikrs and practices,
including repetition of the name of God and recitation of mystic poetry.
By the middle of the fifteenth century, the Nizari Ismaili imams had emerged in the guise of Sufi pirs in the village of Anjudan, in central Persia, which was to
serve as their seat and the headquarters of their da`wa activities for more than two centuries. During this time, the imams
initiated a revival of the Nizari da`wa
as well as its literary activities. They reorganized and reinvigorated
their da`wa not only to win new converts, but also to reassert their
central authority over the various Nizari communities. The imams devoted much energy to limiting the hereditary dynasties of da`is
and pirs who had acquired local leadership positions in Persia, Central
Asia and South Asia, replacing them with their own trusted emissaries. But
the Nizaris still found it necessary, in predominantly Sunni milieus, to
dissimulate in the guise of Sufism.
Meanwhile, the advent of the Safawids in 1501 and their adoption of
Twelver Shi`ism as the state religion promised improved circumstances for
the Nizaris and other Shi`i communities in Persia and adjacent lands.
Consequently, the Nizaris began to reduce the extent to which they
practiced taqiyya in the guise
of Sufism, especially once the Safawids adopted measures to suppress all
popular forms of Sufism. With the veil of taqiyya somewhat lifted, the Nizari identity became better known to
outsiders. However, this invited a new round of persecution against the
Nizaris, as the Safawids opposed all those Shi`i groups and movements
which fell outside of the confines of state-sponsored Twelver Shi`ism. It
was under these circumstances that the Nizaris began to use Twelver
Shi`ism as yet another disguise, one which was retained in Persia until
the early decades of the twentieth century. This form of dissimulation,
too, could be readily accommodated by the Nizaris, who shared the same
early `Alid heritage and Imami Shi`i tradition as the Twelver Shi`is.
The Nizari Ismaili da`wa
met with particular success in South Asia during the Anjudan period. The
earliest Nizari da`is or pirs dispatched from Persia to the Indian subcontinent were
originally active in Sind (modern-day Panjab in Pakistan), where Ismailism
had persisted clandestinely since Fatimid times. Pir Sadr al-Din, who
flourished in the second half of the fourteenth century, is traditionally
considered to have been the founder of the Nizari community in the Indian
subcontinent, where the Nizaris came to be generally designated as Khojas.
He converted large numbers of Hindus from the Lohana trading caste and
gave them the title of Khoja, derived from the Persian word khwaja,
an honorary title meaning ‘lord’ that corresponded to the Hindi term (thakur)
by which the Hindu Lohanas were addressed. The particular form of Nizari
Ismailism that developed in South Asia became known as Satpanth, or
‘true path’.
There is sufficient evidence showing that in South Asia, too, the
Nizaris developed close relations with Sufism. There were strong
affinities between the mystical expressions found in the indigenous
religious literature of the Khojas, hymns known as ginans,
and Sufi poetry composed in Panjabi and other Indic languages which
facilitated Satpanth-Sufi relations. At any rate, Nizari Ismaili Khojas
represented themselves for long periods as one of the many
mystically-oriented communities of Sind which then existed in both the
Sunni Muslim and Hindu milieus of South Asia. This enabled the Nizari
Khojas to blend more readily into the religious, cultural and social
topography of Sind. Consequently, the Khojas attracted less attention as
Ismaili Shi`is, enabling them to escape persecution by Sind’s Sunni
rulers. Unlike their Persian Nizari contemporaries, however, the Nizari
Khojas may not have consciously developed their Sufi connections
exclusively for taqiyya purposes
since they were already somewhat protected against Sunni persecution by
their Hindu cover.
The Nizari imams of the
Anjudan period also entrusted emissaries with special missions intended to
prevent the reversion of the Nizari Khojas to Hinduism, or their
conversion to Sunnism, both of which were dominant in contemporary South
Asian society. Nevertheless, some communities that may once have adhered
to Satpanth Ismailism did revert to Hinduism. In this connection, mention
may be made of the Kamad of Rajasthan. Removed from the centres of
Satpanth in Sind and perhaps originally converted only superficially or
incompletely, the Kamad experienced a process of ‘re-Hinduization.’
Consequently, they rejected their Satpanth heritage, although their
devotional poems continued to be permeated with Ismaili references. Today,
the Kamad are the worshippers of a deity-saint known as Ramdev Pir. As
another example of shifting identities, mention may further be made of the
many isolated Persian Nizari groups which, after extended periods of
dissimulation as Twelver Shi`is, eventually became fully integrated into
their predominantly Twelver Shi`i environment in Persia.
The origins and early development of the unique form of Ismailism
known as Satpanth in South Asia and its religious literature, the ginans, are rather obscure. On the evidence of the ginans,
the Ismaili pirs seem to have actually attempted in a clever fashion to maximize
the appeal of their message to Hindu audiences. Since the Nizari da`wa
in South Asia was addressed mainly to the rural and uneducated lower
castes, the pirs rapidly resorted to the use of Indian vernaculars, rather than
the Arabic and Persian spoken by the educated classes. For the same
reasons, they used Hindu idioms and mythology, interfacing Ismaili Muslim
tenets with ideas, images and symbols that were already known to Hindus--a
strategy of acculturation that proved very successful. It is unnecessary
to add that the Hindu cover of the Nizari Khojas, as expressed in their
Satpanth tradition, not only encouraged conversions, but also served the
purposes of taqiyya and
safeguarded the Khojas in their predominantly Hindu and Sunni Muslim
milieus. Thus, Satpanth Ismailism may be held to represent a complex form
of acculturation and dissimulation ingeniously adapted to the religious,
social, cultural and political structure of South Asia. And, in this
context, taqiyya meant much more
than mere concealment of true identity or superficial adoption of a guise;
it involved an intricate process of indigenization and syncretism.
The Nizari Khojas, along with the Tayyibi Bohras, were among the
earliest Asian communities to settle in East Africa. Indian Ismailis, who
were mostly engaged in trade, began to emigrate from Gujarat, in
particular, to Zanzibar in the first half of the nineteenth century.
Subsequently, they moved from Zanzibar to the urban centres of mainland
East Africa. By the 1960s, important Khoja and Bohra Ismaili communities
existed in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania. But, in the following decade, the
Asian Ismailis of East Africa were obliged to settle in the West owing to
the anti-Asian policies of certain African governments.
By the middle of the eighteenth century, the Nizari imams had transferred their seat to the Persian province of Kirman,
where they acquired political prominence. The Persian Nizari community had
by then shrunk significantly, however, owing to continual persecution as
well as the long-term consequences of dissimulating practices. Many
Persian Nizaris, especially in urban centres, had converted to Twelver
Shi`ism. Hence, by the beginning of the nineteenth century, the Khojas
became increasingly influential within the Nizari Ismaili community, both
because of their numbers and because of their financial resources. Hasan
`Ali Shah succeeded to the Nizari Imamate in 1817 as the forty-sixth imam.
He was the first of the Nizari imams
to bear the title of Agha Khan (Aga Khan). This honorific title, meaning
lord and master, was bestowed upon the imam
by the Persian Qajar monarch, Fath `Ali Shah (1797-1834), and has remained
hereditary among Hasan `Ali Shah’s successors to the Nizari Imamate.
Hasan `Ali Shah, Aga Khan I, was also appointed governor of Kirman, but he
subsequently became enmeshed in a prolonged conflict with the Qajar ruling
establishment which obliged him to flee Persia in 1841. Soon after, the
Nizari imam arrived in Sind,
where he was enthusiastically received by his Khoja followers. In 1848, he
settled permanently in Bombay, marking the commencement of modern Nizari
Ismaili history. Drawing on financial contributions from the Khojas, the imam
established elaborate headquarters in Bombay, Poona and Bangalore.
Aga Khan I spent the last three decades of his long Imamate
(1817-1881) in Bombay, enjoying the protection of the British
establishment there as the spiritual leader of a Muslim community. He
devoted much of his time and resources to asserting his authority over the
Khojas. Some Khojas evidently remained confused regarding their true
religious identity owing to extended dissimulating practices as Sunnis or
Twelver Shi`is, as well as the Hindu elements which permeated their
Satpanth tradition. In legal matters, too, the Nizari Khojas, like other
Indian Muslims, had often observed Hindu customs, especially regarding
inheritance. As dissident Khoja groups periodically claimed a Sunni or
Twelver Shi`i heritage, Aga Khan I found it necessary to launch a major
campaign to redefine and delineate the religious identity of his Khoja
followers in South Asia and East Africa. In 1861, he circulated a document
that explained the religious beliefs and practices of the Nizari Ismailis,
which every Khoja was expected to sign. The Khojas were now, in effect,
required to openly pledge their allegiance to their imam,
who would be the sole interpreter of the Ismaili Shi`i faith. This
document represents a modern milestone in its assertion of Nizari identity
and in its reiteration of the imam’s full authority over his community, as well as his control
over the dues submitted to him.
The Aga Khan’s rights and communal authority were officially
reaffirmed in British India by certain legal judgements of the Bombay High
Court, which explicitly defined the followers of Aga Khan I as a community
of “Shia Imami Ismailis.” Henceforth, the authority of Aga Khan I was
never again seriously challenged and he gradually extended his control
over the Nizari Khojas through their traditional communal organization.
The Nizari Ismailis are still organized throughout the world according to
this traditional structure. Every Khoja community (jama`at)
of a certain size has its mukhi,
an officer who acts as the social and religious head of that community
with the assistance of a kamadia.
These officers collect religious dues and are also responsible for
officiating at various ceremonies in the jama`at-khana,
the congregation hall or centre where the Nizaris gather for religious,
social and cultural activities.
The grandson of Aga Khan I, Sultan Muhammad Shah, Aga Khan III, led
the Nizari Ismailis for seventy-two years (1885-1957), longer than any of
his predecessors. An eminent Muslim reformer and international statesman,
his career and achievements are fully documented. Aga Khan III, who
established his residence in Europe, formulated a multitude of policies
and programs for his followers. For several decades, his religious policy
was centred upon reasserting their identity and he made systematic efforts
to sharpen the distinctions between Nizari Ismailis and Sunnis and Twelver
Shi`is, including certain changes in the religious practices and rituals
of his followers. (In Persia, for instance, the Nizaris had hitherto
observed their religious rituals mainly in the manner of the Twelver
Shi`is and in their mosques.) More specifically, the Nizari identity was
defined in a series of constitutions that Aga Khan III promulgated for his
followers in India, East Africa and other regions. These constitutions
also served as the personal law of the Nizaris. His policy proved quite
effective in preventing secessions from the community as well as the
further assimilation of Nizaris into the dominant religious communities
surrounding them, a frequent result of taqiyya practices.
At the same time, the charismatic leadership of Aga Khan III
afforded him considerable success in reorganizing his followers into a
modern Muslim community with high standards of education, health and
social welfare. In order to implement his reforms, the Nizari imam
developed new institutions and administrative organizations structured as
a hierarchy of councils. The deep devotion of the Nizaris to their imam made all of the modernization policies of Aga Khan III
acceptable to them. He regularly guided his community through his oral or
written edicts, or farmans,
providing yet another communal mechanism for the introduction of reforms.
The education of Ismailis, both male and female, and their health
standards, as well as the participation of women in communal affairs, all
received high priority. His modernization policies were financed by the
religious dues offered to him and the funds collected at his various
jubilee celebrations. Aga Khan III founded and maintained an impressive
network of schools, libraries, hospitals, dispensaries and other
institutions, which were used by Ismailis and non-Ismailis alike. In all
of these ways, Aga Khan III transformed the Nizari Imamate into a
multifaceted institution that led and oversaw the formation of modern
Nizari communities.
The successor to Aga Khan III in the Nizari Ismaili Imamate is his
grandson, Prince Karim Aga Khan IV, who became the forty-ninth imam in 1957. Educated at Harvard University, he has continued and
expanded the modernization policies of his grandfather. Yet, as a Muslim
leader, Aga Khan IV has also been interested in promoting a better
understanding of Islamic civilization, with its diversity of expressions
and interpretations. He has developed a multitude of new programs and
organizations for the benefit of both his community and certain developing
countries, in addition to concerning himself with a number of social,
developmental and cultural issues that are of wider interest to Muslims
and others. To these ends, he has created an elaborate institutional
network, generally referred to as the Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN),
under the overall guidance of the Imamate. He has extended the council
system of communal administration, founded by his grandfather, to new
territories in Europe and North America, in recognition of the large-scale
emigration of Nizaris to the West. Special institutions, designated as
Tariqah Boards, have been made responsible for providing different levels
of religious education to Nizaris where their numbers warrant it. The
Nizaris no longer undertake proselytization, although voluntary conversion
is accommodated; as a result, the da`wa organization, so crucial in medieval times, is no longer in
existence. Instead of da`is, the
Nizaris now have teachers (mu`allims)
and preachers (wa`izs) who
respectively provide religious education for, and deliver sermons to,
members of the community.
All of these achievements in terms of modernization and
cross-cultural adaptation would not have been possible if the Nizari
Imamate had not developed from a doctrine elaborated in medieval times
into a dynamic institution responding to the modern needs of a multicu
ltural and multinational community. Just as important is the continued
perception of the Nizari imams as charismatic leaders by their followers. The case of the
Nizari community of Central Asia provides an excellent example of this.
These Ismailis, living in the midst of the Pamir, Hindu Kush and Karakorum
mountain ranges, have been isolated historically from other Ismaili
communities. As a result, the Ismailis of Central Asia and surrounding
areas developed rather autonomously, elaborating distinctive rituals and
traditions. The Central Asian Ismailis have been mainly concentrated in
Badakhshan, now divided between Tajikistan and Afghanistan. The Nizari
Ismailis of Tajik Badakhshan did not have any contacts with their imam
or his institutions for almost seventy years, from the early 1920s until
the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. Furthermore, the Ismailis of
the Soviet Socialist Republic of Tajikistan were not permitted to practice
their faith due to the anti-religious policies of the Soviet regime. But,
in the post-Soviet era, the Nizari leadership has paid particular
attention to the religious as well as socio-economic affairs of the
Ismailis of Tajikistan, who emerged from their forced isolation in 1991.
The institutional network of the Aga Khan has already been extended to
Tajik Badakhshan, where the bulk of Tajikistan’s Ismailis reside today.
This newly-emerging Ismaili community is now benefiting not only from a
range of socio-economic programs implemented by the Nizari Imamate’s
developmental network, but also from religious education.
In 1995, the Ismailis of Tajikistan had the opportunity of seeing
their imam for the first time.
On that occasion, the author witnessed how the Tajik Ismailis, who had
suffered severe persecution and the repression of their identity under the
Soviets, gathered in tens of thousands in various districts of Badakhshan
to renew their allegiance to Aga Khan IV, attesting to the continuing
charisma of the Imamate. The Ismailis of Tajikistan saw their imam
for the second time in 1998. Nizari Ismailis of different countries and
cultural backgrounds are now actively assisting in the development of the
Ismaili community of Tajikistan and its newly-delineated identity, while
attempting to preserve the region’s distinctive cultural heritage.
The Ismailis, always representing a Muslim minority, often
experienced repression and persecution in the course of their complex and
colourful history. As a result, they frequently resorted to dissimulating
practices at the risk of eventually losing their identity. That the Nizari
Ismailis in particular have survived at all and emerged in modern times as
a prosperous and progressive community with a distinct identity attests to
the strength of their heritage, especially the institution of the Imamate,
and their adaptability to changing circumstances, as well as the foresight
and leadership of their recent modernizing and charismatic imams.
Bibliography
Aga Khan III, Sultan Muhammad Shah. The Memoirs of Aga Khan: World Enough and
Time. London, 1954.
________. Selected
Speeches and Writings of Sir Sultan Muhammad Shah. 2 Vols. Edited by K. K. Aziz. London, 1998.
Algar, Hamid. ‘’The Revolt of Agha Khan Mahallati
and the Transference of the Isma`ili Imamate to India.’’ Studia
Islamica 29 (1969) : 55-81.
________. ‘’Aqa Khan.’’ Encyclopaedia
Iranica. 2:170-175.
Amiji, Hatim M. ‘’The Asian Communities.’’ In
Islam in Africa, eds. J.
Kritzeck and W. H. Lewis, 141-181. New York, 1969.
Asani, Ali S. ‘’The Ginan Literature of the
Ismailis of Indo-Pakistan: Its Origins,
Characteristics and Themes.’’ In Devotion
Divine: Bhakti Traditions from the Regions of India, eds. D. L. Eck and F. Mallison, 1-18.
Groningen and Paris, 1991.
________. ‘’The Isma`ili Ginans:
Reflections on Authority and Authorship.’’ In Mediaeval Isma`ili History
and Thought, ed. F. Daftary, 265-280. Cambridge,
1996.
Boivin, Michel. ‘’The Reform of Islam in Ismaili
Shi`ism from 1885 to 1957.’’ In Confluence of Cultures,
ed. F. N. Delvoye, 121-139. New Delhi, 1994.
Corbin, Henry. Cyclical
Time and Ismaili Gnosis. Translated by R. Manheim and J. W. Morris. London, 1983.
Dabashi, Hamid. Authority
in Islam. New Brunswick, NJ, 1989.
Daftary, Farhad. The
Isma`ilis: Their History and Doctrines. Cambridge, 1990.
________. The
Assassin Legends: Myths of the Isma`ilis. London, 1994.
________. ‘’Diversity in Islam: Communities of
Interpretation.’’ In The Muslim Almanac, ed. Azim A.
Nanji, 161-173. Detroit, 1996.
________. A Short
History of the Ismailis: Traditions of a Muslim Community.
Edinburgh, 1998.
Dumasia, Naoroji M. The
Aga Khan and His Ancestors. Bombay, 1939.
Frischauer, Willi. The
Aga Khans. London, 1970.
Fyzee, Asaf A. A. ‘’The Religion of the Ismailis.’’
In India and Contemporary Islam,
ed. S. T. Lokhandwalla, 70-87. Simla, 1971.
Halm, Heinz. Shiism.
Translated by J. Watson. Edinburgh, 1991.
________. The
Fatimids and Their Traditions of Learning. London, 1997.
Hodgson, Marshall G. S. The
Order of Assassins. The Hague, 1955.
Hollister, John N. The
Shi`a of India. London, 1953.
Holzwarth, Wolfgang. Die
Ismailiten in Nordpakistan. Berlin, 1994.
Hunsberger, Alice C. Nasir Khusraw: The Ruby of Badakhshan. London, 2000.
Ivanow, Wladimir. ‘’Satpanth.’’ In Collectanea, ed. W. Ivanow, 1:1-54. Leiden, 1948.
________. Ismaili
Literature: A Bibliographical Survey. Tehran, 1963.
Keshavjee, Rafique H.
Mysticism
and the Plurality of Meaning: The Case of the
Ismailis of Rural Iran. London, 1998.
Khan, Dominique-Sila.
Conversions
and Shifting Identities: Ramdev Pir and the
Ismailis in Rajasthan. New Delhi, 1997.
Lev, Yaacov. State
and Society in Fatimid Egypt. Leiden, 1991.
Lewis, Bernard. The
Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam. London, 1967.
Madelung, Wilferd. ‘’The Fatimids and the
Qarmatis of Bahrayn.’’ In
Mediaeval Isma`ili History and Thought, ed. F. Daftary, 21-73. Cambridge,
1996.
________. ‘’Aspects of Isma`ili Theology: The
Prophetic Chain and the God beyond Being.’’ In Isma`ili
Contributions to Islamic Culture, ed. S. H. Nasr, 51-65. Tehran, 1977.
________. ‘’Isma`iliyya.’’ Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2d ed. 4:198-206.
Mallison, Françoise. ‘’La secte ismaélienne des
nizari ou satpanthi en Inde: Hétérodoxie
hindoue ou musulmane?’’ In Ascèse
et renoncement en Inde, ed. S. Bouez, 105-113. Paris, 1992.
Mirza, Nasseh A. Syrian
Ismailism. Richmond, UK, 1997.
Misra, Satish C. Muslim
Communities in Gujarat. Bombay, 1964.
Mustansir bi’llah [II].
Pandiyat-i jawanmardi. Edited and translated by W. Ivanow.
Leiden, 1953.
Nanji, Azim. ‘’Modernization and Change in the
Nizari Ismaili Community in East Africa: A Perspective.’’ Journal
of Religion in Africa 6 (1974) : 123-139.
________. The
Nizari Isma`ili Tradition in the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent.
Delmar, NY, 1978.
Poonawala, Ismail K. Biobibliography
of Isma`ili Literature. Malibu, CA, 1977.
Pourjavady, Nasrollah, and Peter L. Wilson.
‘’Isma`ilis and Ni`matullahis.’’
Studia Islamica 41 (1975) : 113-135.
Shackle, Christopher, and Zawahir Moir.
Ismaili Hymns from South Asia: An Introduction to the Ginans. London, 1992.
Stern, Samuel M. Studies
in Early Isma`ilism. Jerusalem and Leiden, 1983.
Al-Tusi, Nasir al-Din Muhammad. Rawdat al-taslim. Edited and translated by W.
Ivanow. Leiden, 1950. [In French: La
convocation d’Alamut: Somme de philosophie ismaélienne. Translated by Christian Jambet.
Lagrasse, 1996.]
Walker, Paul E. Early
Philosophical Shiism. Cambridge, 1993.
