ҹ糡

Hasan II, ‘Ala Dhikrihi’lSalam, Nizari Isma‘iliImamand the fourth ruler ofAlamut(557-61 AH/1162-66 CE). Born in 520AH /1126 CE,ImamHasan II, whom theNizarisaddress as ‘ala Dhikrihi’lSalam(on his mention be peace), succeeded to the leadership of the Nizari Isma‘ilida‘waand state on the death of the third ruler ofAlamut, Muhammad b. Buzurg-Umid on 4 Rabi‘ I 557 AH/ 21 February 1162 CE.

ImamHasan is said to have developed an early interest in learning Isma‘ili doctrines as well as studying philosophical and Sufi writings. In particular, he became well-versed inٲ’w, or esoteric exegesis, which had been applied by theIsma‘ilisto Qur’anic passages as well as the commandments and prohibitions of theshari‘a(Islamic law).

Declaration of the Qiyama

Already in the time of Muhammad b. Buzurg -Umid (532-57 AH/1138-62 CE),ImamHasan II had acquired followers who regarded him as theImampromised by Hasan al-Sabbah, the first ruler ofAlamut. Left without a manifestImamsinceImamNizar b. al-Mustansir’s death in 488 AH/1095 CE, theNizarishad acknowledged Muhammad b. Buzurg-Umid and his predecessors atAlamutmerely as岹‘iԻhujjas, or chief representatives, of their hidden Imams.

The most important event ofImamHasan II’s brief reign was his declaration of theqiyama(the Resurrection), which initiated a new phase in the history of theNizarisof theAlamutperiod (483-654 AH/1090-1256 CE). After making careful preparations, in a solemn ceremony atAlamuton 17 Ramadan 559 AH/ 8 August 1164 CE, in the presence of representatives from different Nizari territories who had been summoned there,ImamHasan II delivered aܳٲand passed on new instructions from the Nizari Imam; according to these instructions theNizarishad now been brought to theqiyama—the Resurrection was upon them. Soon afterwards, on 28 Dhu’l-qi‘da 559 AH/ 18 October 1164 CE, a similar ceremony was held at the castle of Mu’min-Abad to the east ofBirjand, the local headquarters of theNizarisin Quhistan. On that occasionImamHasan II’s new declarations were read out to the representatives of theNizarisof that region by Ra’is Muzaffar, themuhtasham,or chief, of the QuhistaniNizaris. The ruler ofAlamuthad now also announced that, just as previously the FatimidImamal-Mustansir had been God’skhalifaon earth, so nowImamHasan II himself was thatkhalifa. In other words,ImamHasan II had now also claimed the NizariImamatefor himself, at least implicitly. Subsequently,ImamHasan II in his epistles (fusul) implied more clearly that he was theImam, the son of anImamfrom the progeny ofImamNizar b. al- Mustansir, even though he had been considered to be the son of Muhammad b. Buzurg-Umid. The contemporaryNizarisaccepted this claim, which was reiterated more explicitly byImamHasan II’s son and successorImamNural-DinMuhammad. It fell to Rashidal-DinSinan (d. 589 AH/ 1193 CE), the most famous of the Nizari岹‘is in Syria and the original “Old Man of the Mountain” of theCrusaders, to declare theqiyamato the SyrianNizarissoon after 559 AH/ 1164 CE.

 

The Last Day announcement

By declaring theqiyama,ImamHasan II had in effect announced the Last Day, which was eventually interpreted to mean the manifestation of the unveiled truth (haqiqa)that had hitherto been hidden in thebatinor esoteric dimension of the Islamic message.

This was made manifest in the person of the NizariImam, who, as the enunciator of theqiyama, the “qa’imal-qiyama,” held a rank even higher than that of an ordinaryImam. As a result, the members of the Nizari community who acknowledged the NizariImamwere now capable of understanding the true esoteric meaning of the religious laws, and as such, Paradise was actualised for them in this world.

Joveyni, Rashidal-Din, and Kashani, who are the main authorities on the history of the Persian Nizari state, relate that, in line with the circumstances expected in theqiyama, the final eschatologicaldawr(era of human history),ImamHasan II also announced the abrogation of [blind observance of] theshari‘a, which had been enforced rigorously by his predecessors atAlamut.

 

Hasan II’s death and succession

In view of the absence of contemporary Nizari sources from theqiyamatimes and the negative bias of the non-Isma‘ili sources on the subject, it is difficult to know for certain how the declaration of theqiyamawas actually perceived by theNizaris, who continued to regard themselves as Ismaili Shi‘i.

At any rate, Joveyni and other anti-Ismaili authorities, despite their hostile stances, do not report any instances of libertine and permissivist behavior amongst the PersianNizarisimmediately after theqiyama, even though the Nizari leadership had now begun to stress the spiritual inner-interpretation of the law in preference to the blind observance of its literal meaning.

On Sunday 6 Rabi‘ I 561 AH/ 9 January 1166 CE, Hasan II‘ala Dhikrihi’lSalamwas stabbed to death in the castle of Lammasar (Lanbasar; west of Alamut) by Hasan b. Namavar, a brother-in-law who opposed his new policies.

ImamHasan’s son and successor,ImamNural-DinMuhammad, devoted his own long reign (561-607 AH/ 1166-1210 CE) to a systematic elaboration of the doctrine of theqiyama.

Authors

Dr Farhad Daftary

Co-Director and Head of the Department of Academic Research and Publications

An authority in Shi’i studies, with special reference to its Ismaili tradition, Dr. Daftary has published and lectured widely in these fields of Islamic studies. In 2011 a Festschrift entitledFortresses of the Intellectwas produced to honour Dr. Daftary by a number of his colleagues and peers.

 

Read more

Primary sources

  • ‘Ala’al-DinJoveyni,Ta’rikh-e jahan goshay,ed. Muhammad Qazvini, Leiden, 1912-37, III, pp. 225-39; tr. John A. Boyle, Manchester, II, pp. 688-97.
  • Abu’l-Qasim ‘Abd-Allah b. ‘Ali Kashani,Zubdat al-tawarikh: bakhsh-e Fatimian wa Nizarian, ed. Muhammad-Taqi Danishpazhuh, 2nd ed., Tehran, 1366 Sh./1987, pp. 199-208.
  • Abu Eshaq Quhistani,Haftbab, ed. and tr. Wladimir Ivanow, Bombay, 1959, text: pp. 19, 24, 38-44, 46-47, 53, 58, 65; translation: pp. 19, 23, 38-44, 46-47, 53-54, 58, 65.
  • Rashid-al-Din Fadl-Allah,Jami‘ al-tawarikh: qismat-e Esma‘ilian, ed. Muhammad-Taqi Danishpazhuh and M. Mudarrisi-Zanjani, Tehran, 1338 Sh./1959, pp. 162-70.
  • Anon.,Haft bab-e Baba Sayyedna, inTwo Early Ismaili Treatises, ed. Wladimir Ivanow, Bombay, 1933, pp. 4-44.

Secondary sources

  • Henry Corbin, “Huitième centenaire d’Alamut,”Mercure de France, February, 1965, pp. 285-304.
  • Henry Corbin,Cyclical Time and Ismaili Gnosis, London, 1983, pp. 47-58, 97, 117, 155-56.
  • Farhad Daftary,The Isma‘ilis: Their History and Doctrines, Cambridge, 1990, pp. 385-92, 400-402, 408, 410-11, 415.
  • Farhad Daftary, “Persian Historiography of the Early NizariIsma‘ilis,”Iran30, 1992, pp. 91-97.
  • Farhad Daftary,The Assassin Legends: Myths of the Isma‘ilis, London, 1994, pp. 40-41, 42, 78-79, 99, 145-46, 178.
  • Marshall G. S. Hodgson,The Order of Assassins, The Hague, 1955, pp. 148-59, 279-324 (containing the Eng. tr. of the anonymousHaft bab-e Baba Sayyedna).
  • Christian Jambet,La grande résurrection d’Alamut, Lagrasse, 1990, especially pp. 35-73, 95-135, 295 ff.
  • Ismail K. Poonawala,Biobibliography of Isma‘ili Literature, Malibu, Calif., 1977, pp. 257-58.