‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh (‘Ali ibn Buwayh ‘Imad al-Dawla) (Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula) (c. 891/2–December 949). Eldest of the three Daylami brothers who became the founders of the dynasty of the Buyids (Buwayhids). He ruled from 934 to 949. He seized Baghdad in 945 and brought the ‘Abbasid caliph under his control.
'Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula was the founder of the Buyid dynasty in Iran (in Shiraz, 934–949). 'Ali first entered the services of the Samanids under Nasr II, where he became a member of the ruler's entourage. From there he eventually joined Makan, who ruled Gorgan and Ray as a governor of the Samanids, in around 928. He may have done so at Nasr's suggestion. In any case, he managed to occupy a high position under Makan and gained army commissions for his two younger brothers, Hasan and Ahmad. In 930, however, Makan rebelled against the Samanids by seizing Khurasan. He was subsequently attacked by the Ziyarid prince Mardavij and forced to give up Tabaristan.
'Ali and his brothers managed to defect to Mardavij's side just as the Ziyarid was preparing to undertake the conquest to the south of the Alborz mountains as far as Qazvin. Not long afterwards Mardavij granted 'Ali administrative rule over Karaj, a strategically important town probably situated near modern Bahramabad. While making a stop in Ray on his way to Karaj, however, 'Ali was warned by Mardavij's vizier al-'Amid that the Ziyarid was planning to eliminate him. Quickly leaving Ray, he arrived at and took over Karaj.
With a small number of Dailamite troops to support him, 'Ali sought to expand his position. Moving against the heretical Khurramites, who controlled the surrounding mountains, he gained control of the region and was heavily enriched by the expeditions. At the same time, he managed to maintain his troops' loyalty, despite Mardavij's attempts to incite them against their master.
In order to further secure his position, 'Ali decided to seize the nearby city of Isfahan, then under control of the Abbasid governor Yaqut. The enemy army outnumbered 'Ali's, but a large portion of it defected to him upon his appearance before the city. Yaqut, however, refused to negotiate with him, and Mardavij's approach forced him to abandon Isfahan in favor of the Ziyarids. Having fled Karaj as well, 'Ali now took Arrajan, a city between Fars and Khuzestan.
Having stayed for the winter in Arrajan, 'Ali decided to campaign in Fars in the spring of 933. There he encountered the resistance of Yaqut, who was also the governor of Fars and from whom 'Ali had stripped Arrajan. He also found an ally, Zaid ibn 'Ali al-Naubandagani, a wealthy landowner who disliked the Abbasids. After a series of battles, 'Ali managed to prove the victor. By May or June of 934, he entered Shiraz, the capital of Fars.
In order to prevent Mardavij from pressing claims on his territory, 'Ali sought the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, who confirmed him as his viceroy in September or October of 934. Although the caliph's emissary arrived with the insignia for his office, 'Ali delayed giving the requisite tribute. By the time the emissary died in Shiraz two years later, the tribute was still unpaid.
Mardavij continued to pose a threat; he decided to invade Khuzestan, which was still under caliphal control, in order to sever the Buyids from the Caliphate. This invasion prompted the caliph to reach an agreement with the Ziyarid, which forced 'Ali to recognize Mardavij's authority. This recognition proved short-lived, as Mardavij was assassinated in January of 935. 'Ali then decided to press claims on Khuzestan, and occupied 'Askar Mukram. The Buyid and the caliph then came to terms with one another. The latter confirmed 'Ali in his possession of Fars and gave Khuzestan to Yaqut.
Bolstered by many of Mardavij's Turkish mercenaries that had joined him, as well as the collapse of Ziyarid control over central Iran, 'Ali decided that Isfahan should be taken. He sent his brother Hasan to accomplish this. Hasan initially managed to take Isfahan but later encountered difficulties. After Hasan took Isfahan, 'Ali sent his other brother Ahmad to take Kerman. Although the bulk of that province was compelled to recognize Buyid authority, direct control was not established, and 'Ali eventually recalled him.
'Ali next sent Ahmad to Khuzestan, where the Basrian clan of the Baridis had become the de facto rulers of the province but were trying to throw off caliphal rule. They asked 'Ali for their struggle against the Abbasids, providing the pretext for Ahmad to enter Khuzestan. Although the Baridis temporarily recovered the province and even managed to take Baghdad a few times, Ahmad eventually took control of Khuzestan himself. From Khuzestan Ahmad waged a series of campaigns in Iraq, until in 945 he entered Baghdad. The caliph then gave him the title of "Mu'izz al-Daula," while 'Ali and Hasan were given the titles of "'Imad al-Daula" and "Rukn al-Daula," respectively. By 948 Rukn al-Daula had also secured his position in central Iran, causing a clear definition of the borders of the Buyid state.
'Imad al-Daula was not the master of the entire Buyid empire. Rukn al-Daula, partly as a result of 'Imad al-Daula's failure to send him military support during his struggles in central Iran, was relatively independent of his brother. Mu'izz al-Daula, on the other hand, had been given support by his brother in his efforts to take Khuzestan, and was a subordinate of 'Imad al-Daula. He was not listed as an independent ruler on contemporary sources, and the name of his brother appeared before his own on coins struck by him. Despite the fact that Mu'izz al-Daula's capture of Baghdad resulted in him gaining the title of senior amir (amir al-umara'), which in theory made him the highest ranking individual out of all three Buyids, he remained little more than a provincial ruler under 'Imad al-Daula's authority. 'Imad al-Daula himself claimed the title of senior amir during his lifetime, and although he never officially held it, nor was entitled to do so, he was recognized as the de facto holder of that position.
'Imad al-Daula's lack of an heir posed a problem until shortly before his death. A few months beforehand, he settled on Rukn al-Daula's eldest son Fana-Khusrau as his successor. He died in December of 949, and his brothers helped to install Fana-Khusrau (who took the title of "'Adud al-Daula") in Shiraz. Rukn al-Daula, who was the most powerful of the Buyids, claimed the title of senior amir for himself and received both Mu'izz al-Daula's and 'Adud al-Daula's recognition as such.
'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al-Dawla see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Dawla, 'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al- see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh (‘Ali ibn Buwayh ‘Imad al-Dawla) (Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula) (c. 891/2–December 949). Eldest of the three Daylami brothers who became the founders of the dynasty of the Buyids (Buwayhids). He ruled from 934 to 949. He seized Baghdad in 945 and brought the ‘Abbasid caliph under his control.
'Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula was the founder of the Buyid dynasty in Iran (in Shiraz, 934–949). 'Ali first entered the services of the Samanids under Nasr II, where he became a member of the ruler's entourage. From there he eventually joined Makan, who ruled Gorgan and Ray as a governor of the Samanids, in around 928. He may have done so at Nasr's suggestion. In any case, he managed to occupy a high position under Makan and gained army commissions for his two younger brothers, Hasan and Ahmad. In 930, however, Makan rebelled against the Samanids by seizing Khurasan. He was subsequently attacked by the Ziyarid prince Mardavij and forced to give up Tabaristan.
'Ali and his brothers managed to defect to Mardavij's side just as the Ziyarid was preparing to undertake the conquest to the south of the Alborz mountains as far as Qazvin. Not long afterwards Mardavij granted 'Ali administrative rule over Karaj, a strategically important town probably situated near modern Bahramabad. While making a stop in Ray on his way to Karaj, however, 'Ali was warned by Mardavij's vizier al-'Amid that the Ziyarid was planning to eliminate him. Quickly leaving Ray, he arrived at and took over Karaj.
With a small number of Dailamite troops to support him, 'Ali sought to expand his position. Moving against the heretical Khurramites, who controlled the surrounding mountains, he gained control of the region and was heavily enriched by the expeditions. At the same time, he managed to maintain his troops' loyalty, despite Mardavij's attempts to incite them against their master.
In order to further secure his position, 'Ali decided to seize the nearby city of Isfahan, then under control of the Abbasid governor Yaqut. The enemy army outnumbered 'Ali's, but a large portion of it defected to him upon his appearance before the city. Yaqut, however, refused to negotiate with him, and Mardavij's approach forced him to abandon Isfahan in favor of the Ziyarids. Having fled Karaj as well, 'Ali now took Arrajan, a city between Fars and Khuzestan.
Having stayed for the winter in Arrajan, 'Ali decided to campaign in Fars in the spring of 933. There he encountered the resistance of Yaqut, who was also the governor of Fars and from whom 'Ali had stripped Arrajan. He also found an ally, Zaid ibn 'Ali al-Naubandagani, a wealthy landowner who disliked the Abbasids. After a series of battles, 'Ali managed to prove the victor. By May or June of 934, he entered Shiraz, the capital of Fars.
In order to prevent Mardavij from pressing claims on his territory, 'Ali sought the recognition of the Abbasid Caliph, who confirmed him as his viceroy in September or October of 934. Although the caliph's emissary arrived with the insignia for his office, 'Ali delayed giving the requisite tribute. By the time the emissary died in Shiraz two years later, the tribute was still unpaid.
Mardavij continued to pose a threat; he decided to invade Khuzestan, which was still under caliphal control, in order to sever the Buyids from the Caliphate. This invasion prompted the caliph to reach an agreement with the Ziyarid, which forced 'Ali to recognize Mardavij's authority. This recognition proved short-lived, as Mardavij was assassinated in January of 935. 'Ali then decided to press claims on Khuzestan, and occupied 'Askar Mukram. The Buyid and the caliph then came to terms with one another. The latter confirmed 'Ali in his possession of Fars and gave Khuzestan to Yaqut.
Bolstered by many of Mardavij's Turkish mercenaries that had joined him, as well as the collapse of Ziyarid control over central Iran, 'Ali decided that Isfahan should be taken. He sent his brother Hasan to accomplish this. Hasan initially managed to take Isfahan but later encountered difficulties. After Hasan took Isfahan, 'Ali sent his other brother Ahmad to take Kerman. Although the bulk of that province was compelled to recognize Buyid authority, direct control was not established, and 'Ali eventually recalled him.
'Ali next sent Ahmad to Khuzestan, where the Basrian clan of the Baridis had become the de facto rulers of the province but were trying to throw off caliphal rule. They asked 'Ali for their struggle against the Abbasids, providing the pretext for Ahmad to enter Khuzestan. Although the Baridis temporarily recovered the province and even managed to take Baghdad a few times, Ahmad eventually took control of Khuzestan himself. From Khuzestan Ahmad waged a series of campaigns in Iraq, until in 945 he entered Baghdad. The caliph then gave him the title of "Mu'izz al-Daula," while 'Ali and Hasan were given the titles of "'Imad al-Daula" and "Rukn al-Daula," respectively. By 948 Rukn al-Daula had also secured his position in central Iran, causing a clear definition of the borders of the Buyid state.
'Imad al-Daula was not the master of the entire Buyid empire. Rukn al-Daula, partly as a result of 'Imad al-Daula's failure to send him military support during his struggles in central Iran, was relatively independent of his brother. Mu'izz al-Daula, on the other hand, had been given support by his brother in his efforts to take Khuzestan, and was a subordinate of 'Imad al-Daula. He was not listed as an independent ruler on contemporary sources, and the name of his brother appeared before his own on coins struck by him. Despite the fact that Mu'izz al-Daula's capture of Baghdad resulted in him gaining the title of senior amir (amir al-umara'), which in theory made him the highest ranking individual out of all three Buyids, he remained little more than a provincial ruler under 'Imad al-Daula's authority. 'Imad al-Daula himself claimed the title of senior amir during his lifetime, and although he never officially held it, nor was entitled to do so, he was recognized as the de facto holder of that position.
'Imad al-Daula's lack of an heir posed a problem until shortly before his death. A few months beforehand, he settled on Rukn al-Daula's eldest son Fana-Khusrau as his successor. He died in December of 949, and his brothers helped to install Fana-Khusrau (who took the title of "'Adud al-Daula") in Shiraz. Rukn al-Daula, who was the most powerful of the Buyids, claimed the title of senior amir for himself and received both Mu'izz al-Daula's and 'Adud al-Daula's recognition as such.
'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al-Dawla see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Dawla, 'Ali ibn Buwayh 'Imad al- see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
Ali ibn Buya 'Imad al-Daula see ‘Imad al-Dawla, ‘Ali ibn Buwayh
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani (1125-1201). Historian. His most remarkable work is Qussian eloquence on the conquest of Jerusalem (of 1187). The term Qussian is related to the name of Quss ibn Sa‘ida al-Iyadi.
Isfahani, 'Imad al-Din al-Katib al- see ‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani (1125-1201). Historian. His most remarkable work is Qussian eloquence on the conquest of Jerusalem (of 1187). The term Qussian is related to the name of Quss ibn Sa‘ida al-Iyadi.
Isfahani, 'Imad al-Din al-Katib al- see ‘Imad al-Din al-Katib al-Isfahani
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi)(also Zangi, Zengui, Zenki, or Zanki) (İmadeddin Zengi) (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur) (c. 1084/1085–September 14, 1146). Member of the line of the Turkish Zangid dynasty in Mosul and Aleppo (r. 1127-1146). In 1127, he was appointed governor of Mosul, and received the title of atabeg. He took possession of Jazirat ibn ‘Umar, Nisibis, Sinjar, Harran, Aleppo and Hamat. His attack on Baghdad, however, was unsuccessful, as was that of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Mustarshid bi-‘llah on Mosul. ‘Imad al-Din approved of the deposition of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Rashid (r. 1135-1136) and paid homage to the latter’s successor al-Muqtafi (r. 1136-1160). In 1137, he routed King Fulk of Jerusalem, took the fortress of Ba‘rin (Monsferrandus), and pursued the Emperor John II of Constantinople on his return to Antioch after an unsuccessful attack on Shayzar. He received Homs and in 1139 conquered Baalbek. He then laid siege to Damascus, whose commander Mu‘in al-Din invoked the support of the Crusaders. ‘Imad al-Din then raised the siege and returned to Mosul. In 1144, he took Edessa from the Crusaders, which set off the Second Crusade.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi (al-Malik al-Mansur) was the son of Aq Sunqur al-Hajib, governor of Aleppo under Malik Shah I. His father was beheaded for treason in 1094, and Zengi was brought up by Kerbogha, the governor of Mosul.
Zengi became atabeg of Mosul in 1127, and of Aleppo in 1128, uniting the two cities under his personal rule, and was formally invested as their ruler by the Sultan Mahmud II of Great Seljuk. Zengi had supported the young sultan against his rival, the caliph Al-Mustarshid.
In 1130, Zengi allied with Taj al-Mulk Buri of Damascus against the crusaders, but this was only a ruse to extend his power. He had Buri's son taken prisoner and seized Hama from him. He also besieged Hims, the governor of which was accompanying him at the time, but could not capture it, so he returned to Mosul, where Buri's son and the other prisoners from Damascus were ransomed for 50,000 dinars. In 1131, Zengi agreed to return the 50,000 dinars if Buri would deliver to him Dubais, emir of al-Hilla in Iraq, who had fled to Damascus to escape al-Mustarshid. When an ambassador from the caliph arrived to bring Dubais back, Zengi attacked him and killed some of his retinue. The ambassador returned to Baghdad without Dubais.
In 1134, Zengi became involved in Artuqid affairs, allying with the emir Timurtash (son of Ilghazi) against Timurtash's cousin Da'ud. Zengi's real desires, however, lay to the south, in Damascus. In 1135, Zengi received an appeal for help from Ismail, who had succeeded his father Buri as emir of Damascus, and who was in fear for his life from his own citizenry who considered him a cruel tyrant. Ismail was willing to surrender the city to Zengi in order to restore peace. None of Ismail's family or advisors wanted this, however, and Ismail was murdered by his own mother, Zumurrud, to prevent him from turning over the city to Zengi's control. Ismail was succeeded by his brother Shihab ad-Din Mahmud.
Zengi was not discouraged by this turn of events and arrived at Damascus anyway, still intending to seize it. The siege lasted for some time with no success on Zengi's part, so a truce was made and Shahib ad-Din's brother Bahram-Shah was given as a hostage. At the same time, news of the siege had reached the caliph and Baghdad, and a messenger was sent with orders for Zengi to leave Damascus and take control of the governance of Iraq. The messenger was ignored but Zengi gave up the siege, as per the terms of the truce with Shahib ad-Din. On the way back to Aleppo, Zengi besieged Hims, whose governor had angered him, and Shahib ad-Din responded to the city's call for help by sending Mu'in ad-Din Unur to govern it.
In 1137 Zengi besieged Hims again but Mu'in ad-Din successfully defended it. In response to Zengi's renewed attack, Damascus allied with the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem against him. Zengi laid siege to the Crusader fortress of Ba'rin and quickly crushed the army of Jerusalem. King Fulk of Jerusalem agreed to surrender and was allowed to flee with his surviving troops. Zengi, realizing that this new expedition against Damascus was bound to fail, made peace with Shahib ad-Din, just in time to be confronted at Aleppo by an army sent by the Byzantine Emperor John II Comnenus. The Emperor had recently brought the Crusader Principality of Antioch under Byzantine control, and allied himself with Joscelin II of Edessa and Raymond of Antioch. Facing a combined Byzantine/crusader threat, Zengi mobilized his forces and recruited assistance from other Muslim leaders. In April 1138, the armies of the Byzantine emperor and the crusader princes laid siege to Shaizar, but were turned back by Zengi's forces a month later.
In May 1138 Zengi came to an agreement with Damascus. He married Zumurrud, the same woman who had murdered her son Ismail, and received Hims as her dowry. In July 1139 Zumurrud's surviving son, Shihab ad-Din, was assassinated and Zengi marched on Damascus to take possession of the city. The Damascenes, united under Mu'in ad-Din Unur, acting as regent for Shihab ad-Din's successor Jamal ad-Din, once again allied with Jerusalem to repel Zengi. Zengi also besieged Jamal ad-Din's former possession of Baalbek, and Mu'in ad-Din was in charge of its defenses as well. After Zengi abandoned his siege of Damascus, Jamal ad-Din died of a disease, and was succeeded by his son Mujir ad-Din, with Mu'in ad-Din remaining as regent.
Mu'in ad-Din signed a new peace treaty with Jerusalem for their mutual protection against Zengi. While Mu'in ad-Din and the crusaders joined together to besiege Banias, Zengi once more laid siege to Damascus, but quickly abandoned it again. There were no major engagements between the crusaders, Damascus, and Zengi for the next few years, but Zengi in the meantime campaigned in the north and captured Ashib and the Armenian fortress of Hizan.
In 1144, Zengi besieged the crusader County of Edessa. Edessa was the weakest and least Latinized crusader state, and Zengi captured it on December 24, 1144. This event led to the Second Crusade, and later Muslim chroniclers noted it as the start of the jihad against the Crusader states.
Though he continued his attempts to take Damascus in 1145, Zengi was assassinated by a Frankish slave named Yarankash in 1146. The Christian chronicler William of Tyre said that he was killed by a number of his retinue while he lay drunk in his bed. Zengi's sudden death threw his forces into a panic. His army disintegrated, the treasury was looted, and the crusader princes, made bold by Zengi's demise, plotted to attack Aleppo and Edessa. Mu'in ad-Din immediately recaptured Baalbek, Hims, and other territories lost to Zengi over the years.
Zengi was the founder of the eponymous Zengid dynasty. In Mosul he was succeeded by his eldest son Saif ad-Din Ghazi I and in Aleppo he was succeeded by his second son Nur ad-Din.
Zengi was courageous, strong in leadership and a very skilled warrior according to all of the Islam chroniclers of his day. The conquest of Edessa being his greatest achievement. These same chroniclers however, also relate Zengi as being a very violent, cruel, and brutal man. Muslims, Byzantines, and Franks all suffered at his hands.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
İmadeddin Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Mansur, Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al- see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi Imadeddin see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi, Imad ad-Din Atabeg see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi)(also Zangi, Zengui, Zenki, or Zanki) (İmadeddin Zengi) (Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur) (c. 1084/1085–September 14, 1146). Member of the line of the Turkish Zangid dynasty in Mosul and Aleppo (r. 1127-1146). In 1127, he was appointed governor of Mosul, and received the title of atabeg. He took possession of Jazirat ibn ‘Umar, Nisibis, Sinjar, Harran, Aleppo and Hamat. His attack on Baghdad, however, was unsuccessful, as was that of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Mustarshid bi-‘llah on Mosul. ‘Imad al-Din approved of the deposition of the ‘Abbasid Caliph al-Rashid (r. 1135-1136) and paid homage to the latter’s successor al-Muqtafi (r. 1136-1160). In 1137, he routed King Fulk of Jerusalem, took the fortress of Ba‘rin (Monsferrandus), and pursued the Emperor John II of Constantinople on his return to Antioch after an unsuccessful attack on Shayzar. He received Homs and in 1139 conquered Baalbek. He then laid siege to Damascus, whose commander Mu‘in al-Din invoked the support of the Crusaders. ‘Imad al-Din then raised the siege and returned to Mosul. In 1144, he took Edessa from the Crusaders, which set off the Second Crusade.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi (al-Malik al-Mansur) was the son of Aq Sunqur al-Hajib, governor of Aleppo under Malik Shah I. His father was beheaded for treason in 1094, and Zengi was brought up by Kerbogha, the governor of Mosul.
Zengi became atabeg of Mosul in 1127, and of Aleppo in 1128, uniting the two cities under his personal rule, and was formally invested as their ruler by the Sultan Mahmud II of Great Seljuk. Zengi had supported the young sultan against his rival, the caliph Al-Mustarshid.
In 1130, Zengi allied with Taj al-Mulk Buri of Damascus against the crusaders, but this was only a ruse to extend his power. He had Buri's son taken prisoner and seized Hama from him. He also besieged Hims, the governor of which was accompanying him at the time, but could not capture it, so he returned to Mosul, where Buri's son and the other prisoners from Damascus were ransomed for 50,000 dinars. In 1131, Zengi agreed to return the 50,000 dinars if Buri would deliver to him Dubais, emir of al-Hilla in Iraq, who had fled to Damascus to escape al-Mustarshid. When an ambassador from the caliph arrived to bring Dubais back, Zengi attacked him and killed some of his retinue. The ambassador returned to Baghdad without Dubais.
In 1134, Zengi became involved in Artuqid affairs, allying with the emir Timurtash (son of Ilghazi) against Timurtash's cousin Da'ud. Zengi's real desires, however, lay to the south, in Damascus. In 1135, Zengi received an appeal for help from Ismail, who had succeeded his father Buri as emir of Damascus, and who was in fear for his life from his own citizenry who considered him a cruel tyrant. Ismail was willing to surrender the city to Zengi in order to restore peace. None of Ismail's family or advisors wanted this, however, and Ismail was murdered by his own mother, Zumurrud, to prevent him from turning over the city to Zengi's control. Ismail was succeeded by his brother Shihab ad-Din Mahmud.
Zengi was not discouraged by this turn of events and arrived at Damascus anyway, still intending to seize it. The siege lasted for some time with no success on Zengi's part, so a truce was made and Shahib ad-Din's brother Bahram-Shah was given as a hostage. At the same time, news of the siege had reached the caliph and Baghdad, and a messenger was sent with orders for Zengi to leave Damascus and take control of the governance of Iraq. The messenger was ignored but Zengi gave up the siege, as per the terms of the truce with Shahib ad-Din. On the way back to Aleppo, Zengi besieged Hims, whose governor had angered him, and Shahib ad-Din responded to the city's call for help by sending Mu'in ad-Din Unur to govern it.
In 1137 Zengi besieged Hims again but Mu'in ad-Din successfully defended it. In response to Zengi's renewed attack, Damascus allied with the crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem against him. Zengi laid siege to the Crusader fortress of Ba'rin and quickly crushed the army of Jerusalem. King Fulk of Jerusalem agreed to surrender and was allowed to flee with his surviving troops. Zengi, realizing that this new expedition against Damascus was bound to fail, made peace with Shahib ad-Din, just in time to be confronted at Aleppo by an army sent by the Byzantine Emperor John II Comnenus. The Emperor had recently brought the Crusader Principality of Antioch under Byzantine control, and allied himself with Joscelin II of Edessa and Raymond of Antioch. Facing a combined Byzantine/crusader threat, Zengi mobilized his forces and recruited assistance from other Muslim leaders. In April 1138, the armies of the Byzantine emperor and the crusader princes laid siege to Shaizar, but were turned back by Zengi's forces a month later.
In May 1138 Zengi came to an agreement with Damascus. He married Zumurrud, the same woman who had murdered her son Ismail, and received Hims as her dowry. In July 1139 Zumurrud's surviving son, Shihab ad-Din, was assassinated and Zengi marched on Damascus to take possession of the city. The Damascenes, united under Mu'in ad-Din Unur, acting as regent for Shihab ad-Din's successor Jamal ad-Din, once again allied with Jerusalem to repel Zengi. Zengi also besieged Jamal ad-Din's former possession of Baalbek, and Mu'in ad-Din was in charge of its defenses as well. After Zengi abandoned his siege of Damascus, Jamal ad-Din died of a disease, and was succeeded by his son Mujir ad-Din, with Mu'in ad-Din remaining as regent.
Mu'in ad-Din signed a new peace treaty with Jerusalem for their mutual protection against Zengi. While Mu'in ad-Din and the crusaders joined together to besiege Banias, Zengi once more laid siege to Damascus, but quickly abandoned it again. There were no major engagements between the crusaders, Damascus, and Zengi for the next few years, but Zengi in the meantime campaigned in the north and captured Ashib and the Armenian fortress of Hizan.
In 1144, Zengi besieged the crusader County of Edessa. Edessa was the weakest and least Latinized crusader state, and Zengi captured it on December 24, 1144. This event led to the Second Crusade, and later Muslim chroniclers noted it as the start of the jihad against the Crusader states.
Though he continued his attempts to take Damascus in 1145, Zengi was assassinated by a Frankish slave named Yarankash in 1146. The Christian chronicler William of Tyre said that he was killed by a number of his retinue while he lay drunk in his bed. Zengi's sudden death threw his forces into a panic. His army disintegrated, the treasury was looted, and the crusader princes, made bold by Zengi's demise, plotted to attack Aleppo and Edessa. Mu'in ad-Din immediately recaptured Baalbek, Hims, and other territories lost to Zengi over the years.
Zengi was the founder of the eponymous Zengid dynasty. In Mosul he was succeeded by his eldest son Saif ad-Din Ghazi I and in Aleppo he was succeeded by his second son Nur ad-Din.
Zengi was courageous, strong in leadership and a very skilled warrior according to all of the Islam chroniclers of his day. The conquest of Edessa being his greatest achievement. These same chroniclers however, also relate Zengi as being a very violent, cruel, and brutal man. Muslims, Byzantines, and Franks all suffered at his hands.
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
İmadeddin Zengi see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al-Mansur see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Mansur, Imad ad-Din Atabeg Zengi al-Malik al- see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi Imadeddin see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
Zengi, Imad ad-Din Atabeg see ‘Imad al-Din Zangi I ibn Aq Sunqur
‘Imad Shahi
‘Imad Shahi. Ttitle of the ruling family, founded by a Hindu convert to Islam, which ruled over Berar, the eastern districts of what is now Maharashtra State, western India, from 1490 until 1574.
‘Imad Shahi. Ttitle of the ruling family, founded by a Hindu convert to Islam, which ruled over Berar, the eastern districts of what is now Maharashtra State, western India, from 1490 until 1574.
imam
imam (Arabic for “leader” or “exemplar”). In general usage in Islam, the imam is the political head of the Muslim community or the person who leads prayer services. The Prophet Muhammad and his early successors -- including those of the Umayyad caliphate (661-750) -- performed both functions. The head of state himself led Friday prayers in the central capital mosque, and his governors did the same in provincial capitals. Later, however, administrative and political functions were separated from religious ones. In Shi‘ite Islam, the term imam is applied to the person who is both the political and religious leader. He must be descended from Ali and Fatima (the son-in-law and daughter of the Prophet Muhammad). No imam, however, except Ali, ever ruled, and beginning with the sixth imam, Jafar al-Sadiq (c.700-765), all eschewed political power. The imam is regarded by the main body of Shi‘ites as immune from error and sin and by the Isma‘ilis as a veritable incarnation of God. Both sects believe the last imam to be in concealment, and they await his return.
The term imam is used seven times in the singular form and five times in plural form (a‘imma) in the Qur‘an. However, large parts of its content are a result of theological developments.
The term imam is used in many different contexts, and with different meanings. There are five different ways of using the term, but there has never been any attempt to create a consolidated system for the different usages. It differs from group to group, from sect to sect and sometimes even from mosque to mosque.
In Shi‘a Islam, the ideas around the imam go to the very core foundations upon which the rest of the Shi'a theology rests. In Sunni Islam, the term imam is used principally as a title, and has minimal importance in theology.
The Sunni congregational prayer performed in the mosque is supposed to have a leader, and this person is called imam. In the standard interpretation, being imam is not having a profession, nor is it a qualification. The imam is imam only as long as he is leading the prayer. Any respected Muslim who is normally well-trained in the prayer, as-Salat, can be an imam. In general, it is the most learned and most respected person in the assembly who is offered the honor of being imam. However, in modern times, many mosques have made their imam into something more – an employed leader of the congregation, a spokesperson for the members of the congregation and an adviser in all questions that relate to Islam.
There are several different points of view with regard to the term imam among the Shi‘is. There are differences over what makes an imam an imam, and therefore who should be imam. At the time of the first imam, Ali, there was one view, even if the imamship was not yet defined. The original concept of the imam included the following requirements:
Be a man of direct descent of either Husayn or his brother Hassan
Not be a minor
Be sound in mind and body
Have good knowledge of theology
Have the capacity of being a ruler
The imam is supposed to have a special closeness to God – to have something that comes close to divine powers. The imam is supposed to be the guidance of the human race, in both religious as well as secular issues. Due to this quality, for the Shi'a, there can only be one imam at a time. For the Shi'a, the imam is the only one who can give interpretations of the Qur‘an and the hadiths. Hence, he is the only one who can rule the Muslim society on a day to day basis.
For many Shi‘as there are two types of imams: The true and the false. The false imams are the Ummawiyy and Abbasid caliphs, while the true imams are Ali, Hassan, Husayn, Ali, Muhammad, Jafar, Musa, Ali,
Muhammad, Ali, Hassan, and Muhammadu al-Mahdi. According to the Ithna ‘Ashari (Twelver) Shi‘is – which is the largest group of Shi‘a – there were twelve imams, of which the last went into occultation around 941 of the Christian calendar. This last imam is expected back as the Mahdi – a savior character with many similarities with the Messiah of Judaism and Christianity.
Along the line of the twelve imams, there were many disputes over who was the right imam. Records show that there were more than forty Shi‘a sects growing out of these indifferences, where the first group was the Saba‘iyya, who thought that Ali achieved the quality of being God, and went into occultation instead of dying.
With all imams, save Husayn, groups differed over who was the right imam. Most of these groups have long since disappeared, but a few of them still exist.
After the fourth imam died in 712 or 713, one group advocated that Zayd was the rightful new imam, and from this assertion came the Zaydis. The Zaydis believe that there can be more than one imam at one time, and that there can be periods when there are no imams at all.
Some years later (around 765), another group claimed that Isma‘il was the rightful seventh imam, and from this claim came the Isma‘ilis, and even later, the Druze.
With Ayatollah Khomeini a new orientation found its place in Twelver Shi‘ism. Many of the qualities which earlier rested with the imam alone were defined to be within the reach of the very most learned men of their branch of Islam. Thus, Khomeini and his closest aides, could effectively rule the religious life of Iran, something that would not have been possible if the older concept of the imam had continued to prevail (since only the imam can be the rightful leader of the Muslim community).
Amongst Sunni Muslims, the caliphs have been called “imams”. However, since there are no longer any caliphs, the use of the term imam has been relegated to being one of lesser importance. Indeed, as a way of expressing eminence for certain learned men inside Islam, the term imam has been added to their names. Examples of learned men being called imam are the founders of the schools of the shari'a, and the great theologian al-Ghazzali.
Among Ithna Ashari (Imani, Twelver) Shi‘ites, the living imam is the twelfth in the line of Ali through Husain. This imam disappeared from ordinary contact with his followers in 874. Since 940 (or 941), he has been in total occultation (ghaiba), but, according to the Twelvers, he will return in the future to establish justice and rid the world of evil.
Other Shi‘a (Isma‘ilis, Zaydis) accept modifications in the concept of the imamate and hold a different line of imams to have been correct. For example, one branch of the Isma‘ilis maintains that the current Agha Khan is the forty-ninth imam in a direct, unbroken line from Ali.
"leader" see imam
"exemplar" see imam
Along the line of the twelve imams, there were many disputes over who was the right imam. Records show that there were more than forty Shi‘a sects growing out of these indifferences, where the first group was the Saba‘iyya, who thought that Ali achieved the quality of being God, and went into occultation instead of dying.
With all imams, save Husayn, groups differed over who was the right imam. Most of these groups have long since disappeared, but a few of them still exist.
After the fourth imam died in 712 or 713, one group advocated that Zayd was the rightful new imam, and from this assertion came the Zaydis. The Zaydis believe that there can be more than one imam at one time, and that there can be periods when there are no imams at all.
Some years later (around 765), another group claimed that Isma‘il was the rightful seventh imam, and from this claim came the Isma‘ilis, and even later, the Druze.
With Ayatollah Khomeini a new orientation found its place in Twelver Shi‘ism. Many of the qualities which earlier rested with the imam alone were defined to be within the reach of the very most learned men of their branch of Islam. Thus, Khomeini and his closest aides, could effectively rule the religious life of Iran, something that would not have been possible if the older concept of the imam had continued to prevail (since only the imam can be the rightful leader of the Muslim community).
Amongst Sunni Muslims, the caliphs have been called “imams”. However, since there are no longer any caliphs, the use of the term imam has been relegated to being one of lesser importance. Indeed, as a way of expressing eminence for certain learned men inside Islam, the term imam has been added to their names. Examples of learned men being called imam are the founders of the schools of the shari'a, and the great theologian al-Ghazzali.
Among Ithna Ashari (Imani, Twelver) Shi‘ites, the living imam is the twelfth in the line of Ali through Husain. This imam disappeared from ordinary contact with his followers in 874. Since 940 (or 941), he has been in total occultation (ghaiba), but, according to the Twelvers, he will return in the future to establish justice and rid the world of evil.
Other Shi‘a (Isma‘ilis, Zaydis) accept modifications in the concept of the imamate and hold a different line of imams to have been correct. For example, one branch of the Isma‘ilis maintains that the current Agha Khan is the forty-ninth imam in a direct, unbroken line from Ali.
"leader" see imam
"exemplar" see imam
Imam
Imam. In Brazil, a spiritual leader among Muslim blacks.
Imam. In Brazil, a spiritual leader among Muslim blacks.
Imam Bondjol
Imam Bondjol (b. 1772, Kampung Tandjung Bunga, Sumatra — d. November 6, 1864, Manado, Celebes). Indonesian religious leader. Tuanku Imam Bondjol was originally named Mohammad Sjahab and in his youth was called Peto Sjarif, Malin Basa (Mualim Besar), and Tuanku Mudo. The name -- or, more precisely, the title, Tuanku Imam Bondjol derives from the fortified village of Bondjol, founded in 1806-1807 in the valley of Alahan Panjang. Imam Bondjol was a student of Tuanku Nan Rintjeh. After his teacher's death Imam Bondjol became the most important leader of the fundamentalist Islamic Padri movement in the Minangkabau in western Sumatra. He also fought the Dutch, who tried to intervene after 1821. He was captured by the Dutch in 1837 after the fall of Bondjol and banished to Cianjur, Ambon (1839), and then to Manado, Sulawesi (1841).
Imam Bondjol was the leader in a religious war that divided the Minangkabau people of Sumatra. A convert to reformist Wahhabi Islam, known in Sumatra as the Padri sect, he established the fortified community of Bondjol, from which he took his name, as a center from which to wage holy war. The secular government called on the Dutch to help, but the Dutch were preoccupied with the Java War (1825 – 30), and Imam Bondjol's forces expanded the area under their control. The Dutch eventually turned their attention to the Padris and defeated them. Imam Bondjol surrendered in 1837, and the Minangkabau territory was added to the Dutch colonial holdings.
Bondjol, Imam see Imam Bondjol
Tuanku Imam Bondjol see Imam Bondjol
Mohammad Sjahab see Imam Bondjol
Sjahab, Mohammad see Imam Bondjol
Peto Sjarif see Imam Bondjol
Malin Basa see Imam Bondjol
Imam Bondjol (b. 1772, Kampung Tandjung Bunga, Sumatra — d. November 6, 1864, Manado, Celebes). Indonesian religious leader. Tuanku Imam Bondjol was originally named Mohammad Sjahab and in his youth was called Peto Sjarif, Malin Basa (Mualim Besar), and Tuanku Mudo. The name -- or, more precisely, the title, Tuanku Imam Bondjol derives from the fortified village of Bondjol, founded in 1806-1807 in the valley of Alahan Panjang. Imam Bondjol was a student of Tuanku Nan Rintjeh. After his teacher's death Imam Bondjol became the most important leader of the fundamentalist Islamic Padri movement in the Minangkabau in western Sumatra. He also fought the Dutch, who tried to intervene after 1821. He was captured by the Dutch in 1837 after the fall of Bondjol and banished to Cianjur, Ambon (1839), and then to Manado, Sulawesi (1841).
Imam Bondjol was the leader in a religious war that divided the Minangkabau people of Sumatra. A convert to reformist Wahhabi Islam, known in Sumatra as the Padri sect, he established the fortified community of Bondjol, from which he took his name, as a center from which to wage holy war. The secular government called on the Dutch to help, but the Dutch were preoccupied with the Java War (1825 – 30), and Imam Bondjol's forces expanded the area under their control. The Dutch eventually turned their attention to the Padris and defeated them. Imam Bondjol surrendered in 1837, and the Minangkabau territory was added to the Dutch colonial holdings.
Bondjol, Imam see Imam Bondjol
Tuanku Imam Bondjol see Imam Bondjol
Mohammad Sjahab see Imam Bondjol
Sjahab, Mohammad see Imam Bondjol
Peto Sjarif see Imam Bondjol
Malin Basa see Imam Bondjol
Imamiyya
Imamiyya. Arabic term which means “followers of the imam.” Imami is an adjective derived from Imamiyya. The Imamiyya is a general designation of those Shi‘ites who believe in the necessity of the office of imam, the infallibility of the imam, and his being designated to the office by his predecessor -- his nass. The term Imamiyya refers in particular to the “Twelvers.”
Imamite authors, in their exposition of the Shi‘ite creed, divide the principles of religion into five tenets: (1) the affirmation of the unity of God; (2) a belief in the justice of God; (3) a belief in prophecy; (4) a belief in the imamate; and (5) a belief in the Day of Judgment. In four of these principles (1, 2, 3, and 5), the Imamites share common ground with the Sunnites albeit with some minor divergences. Sunnites, however, do not consider the fourth principle -- the belief in the imamate -- to be a fundamental principle of Islam, while the Shi‘ites make it their cardinal principle.
The Shi‘ites regard their imams as designated by God through Muhammad his Prophet, in accordance with the testament revealed to the Prophet, which announces the names of those who would succeed him. The testament also carried instruction for each imam to follow. Thus the first three imams, Ali, Hasan and Husayn chose to resist the Umayyad caliphate while the succeeding eight imams (Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Musa al-Kazim, Ali al-Rida, Muhammad al-Jawad, Ali al-Hadi, and al-Hasan al-‘Askari) chose political acquiescence until the rising of the twelfth imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, who went into “complete occultation” in 940 C.C., in compliance with the instruction in the testament.
The special mark of the imam, as it was known to the later Imamites, was infallibility. Whereas Sunnite theologians considered infallibility to be a peculiar quality of the Prophet, Shi‘ite theologians contended that since the imamate was intended as the continuation of the Prophet’s mission, the community needed an infallible leader. The difference between the two creeds became marked when the Shi‘ite imam was asserted to have possessed the light of God, which was passed on to him by the Prophet.
The prophetic heritage of the imam guarantees the survival of religion in his person. The imam alone is endowed with the power of interpreting religion at different times. As a result, a person who dies without acknowledging his imam dies a death of ignorance. This means there is an imam in every age, whether manifest or concealed, who calls people to the way of God. But there are times when the world can be without a manifest imam; this is so when God is enraged at the people who have threatened the safety of the imam and who are unable to see the imam who is in occultation although he sees them.
Occultation is a state chosen by God for the imam who is in danger of being slain by his enemies. Thus, the twelfth imam, al-Mahdi, went into occultation and will continue to live in this state for as long as God deems it necessary. Then God will command him to reappear and take control of the world, in order to restore justice and equity. During this period of concealment, the imam is not completely cut off from his followers but has spokesmen, in the person of learned jurists -- mujtahids -- who can act on his behalf and guide the Shi‘ites in religious, social, and political matters.
Imamite piety, although differing little from Sunnite piety in its adherence to the sharia, developed its own sharia. Imamites depended on the Qur‘an as well as hadith for validating religious injunctions, but they looked to the sunna of the imams in addition to that of the Prophet. Yet except for the special place given to the reports of the imams, their hadith were often almost identical with those of the Sunnites. However, their piety included the devotion of the imams as expressed in the annual commemoration of the ta‘ziya -- the wrongs committed against the household of the Prophet, especially the murder of al-Husayn -- and the visit (the ziyara) to the tombs (mashhads) of all the imams, believed to have suffered at the hands of oppressive Sunnite caliphs. The other marks of Shi‘ite piety include dissimulation of one’s true opinion as part of the religious duty, in order not to arouse animosity of other Muslims, and the payment of the “fifth,” a tax intended for pious purposes and particularly for the descendants of the Prophet.
Followers of the imam see Imamiyya.
Imamiyya. Arabic term which means “followers of the imam.” Imami is an adjective derived from Imamiyya. The Imamiyya is a general designation of those Shi‘ites who believe in the necessity of the office of imam, the infallibility of the imam, and his being designated to the office by his predecessor -- his nass. The term Imamiyya refers in particular to the “Twelvers.”
Imamite authors, in their exposition of the Shi‘ite creed, divide the principles of religion into five tenets: (1) the affirmation of the unity of God; (2) a belief in the justice of God; (3) a belief in prophecy; (4) a belief in the imamate; and (5) a belief in the Day of Judgment. In four of these principles (1, 2, 3, and 5), the Imamites share common ground with the Sunnites albeit with some minor divergences. Sunnites, however, do not consider the fourth principle -- the belief in the imamate -- to be a fundamental principle of Islam, while the Shi‘ites make it their cardinal principle.
The Shi‘ites regard their imams as designated by God through Muhammad his Prophet, in accordance with the testament revealed to the Prophet, which announces the names of those who would succeed him. The testament also carried instruction for each imam to follow. Thus the first three imams, Ali, Hasan and Husayn chose to resist the Umayyad caliphate while the succeeding eight imams (Ali ibn al-Husayn, Muhammad al-Baqir, Ja‘far al-Sadiq, Musa al-Kazim, Ali al-Rida, Muhammad al-Jawad, Ali al-Hadi, and al-Hasan al-‘Askari) chose political acquiescence until the rising of the twelfth imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, who went into “complete occultation” in 940 C.C., in compliance with the instruction in the testament.
The special mark of the imam, as it was known to the later Imamites, was infallibility. Whereas Sunnite theologians considered infallibility to be a peculiar quality of the Prophet, Shi‘ite theologians contended that since the imamate was intended as the continuation of the Prophet’s mission, the community needed an infallible leader. The difference between the two creeds became marked when the Shi‘ite imam was asserted to have possessed the light of God, which was passed on to him by the Prophet.
The prophetic heritage of the imam guarantees the survival of religion in his person. The imam alone is endowed with the power of interpreting religion at different times. As a result, a person who dies without acknowledging his imam dies a death of ignorance. This means there is an imam in every age, whether manifest or concealed, who calls people to the way of God. But there are times when the world can be without a manifest imam; this is so when God is enraged at the people who have threatened the safety of the imam and who are unable to see the imam who is in occultation although he sees them.
Occultation is a state chosen by God for the imam who is in danger of being slain by his enemies. Thus, the twelfth imam, al-Mahdi, went into occultation and will continue to live in this state for as long as God deems it necessary. Then God will command him to reappear and take control of the world, in order to restore justice and equity. During this period of concealment, the imam is not completely cut off from his followers but has spokesmen, in the person of learned jurists -- mujtahids -- who can act on his behalf and guide the Shi‘ites in religious, social, and political matters.
Imamite piety, although differing little from Sunnite piety in its adherence to the sharia, developed its own sharia. Imamites depended on the Qur‘an as well as hadith for validating religious injunctions, but they looked to the sunna of the imams in addition to that of the Prophet. Yet except for the special place given to the reports of the imams, their hadith were often almost identical with those of the Sunnites. However, their piety included the devotion of the imams as expressed in the annual commemoration of the ta‘ziya -- the wrongs committed against the household of the Prophet, especially the murder of al-Husayn -- and the visit (the ziyara) to the tombs (mashhads) of all the imams, believed to have suffered at the hands of oppressive Sunnite caliphs. The other marks of Shi‘ite piety include dissimulation of one’s true opinion as part of the religious duty, in order not to arouse animosity of other Muslims, and the payment of the “fifth,” a tax intended for pious purposes and particularly for the descendants of the Prophet.
Followers of the imam see Imamiyya.
Imamzadah
Imamzadah (Imamzadeh) ("Imam-born"). Literally means “offspring or descendant of an imam.” In Iran, the term imamzadah is most commonly applied to a shrine tomb of a descendant of the Shi‘a imams.
An Imāmzādeh is a word found in both the Persian and Urdu languages, that refers to an immediate descendant of a Shi'a Imam.
The word is also used to refer to a shrine that is specific to Shī‘ah Islām, in which an Imamzadeh is buried. The descendants of the Shia Imams are venerated for their own contributions to the religion, and for their direct lineage to Muhammad.
The shrines attract many visitors and pilgrims for Ziyarat, and are scattered in many numbers throughout Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan. They usually exhibit exquisite architecture and craftsmanship in their interiors.
Imamzadehs include:
* Imamzadeh Hamzah, Tabriz
* Imamzadeh Ja'far, Borujerd
* Imamzadeh Saleh, Shemiran
* Imamzadeh Sultan Mutahhar
* Shāh Abdol Azīm
* Shāh Chérāgh
Offspring of an Imam see Imamzadah
Descendant of an Imam see Imamzadah
"Imam-born" see Imamzadah
Imamzadah (Imamzadeh) ("Imam-born"). Literally means “offspring or descendant of an imam.” In Iran, the term imamzadah is most commonly applied to a shrine tomb of a descendant of the Shi‘a imams.
An Imāmzādeh is a word found in both the Persian and Urdu languages, that refers to an immediate descendant of a Shi'a Imam.
The word is also used to refer to a shrine that is specific to Shī‘ah Islām, in which an Imamzadeh is buried. The descendants of the Shia Imams are venerated for their own contributions to the religion, and for their direct lineage to Muhammad.
The shrines attract many visitors and pilgrims for Ziyarat, and are scattered in many numbers throughout Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Azerbaijan and Afghanistan. They usually exhibit exquisite architecture and craftsmanship in their interiors.
Imamzadehs include:
* Imamzadeh Hamzah, Tabriz
* Imamzadeh Ja'far, Borujerd
* Imamzadeh Saleh, Shemiran
* Imamzadeh Sultan Mutahhar
* Shāh Abdol Azīm
* Shāh Chérāgh
Offspring of an Imam see Imamzadah
Descendant of an Imam see Imamzadah
"Imam-born" see Imamzadah
‘Imran
‘Imran (in Hebrew, ‘Amram). Muslim authors mention two persons of this name, the first of whom appears in the Bible but not in the Qur‘an, the second vice versa. The first is the father of Moses, Aaron and Maryam (Exodus 6:20), the other the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus (Qur‘an 3:31). The last mentioned is also, according to the historians, the father of Elizabeth (in Arabic, Ashba‘), the mother of John the Baptist.
Imran is a male Arabic given name that means construction, prosperity, and happiness. It is a very popular first name throughout the Arab and Muslim World.
The name may refer to:
* Imran, the father of Mariam/Maryam in the Qur'an
o The Al-i-Imran, is the 3rd chapter of the Qur'an with two hundred verses
* Abu Talib ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (549-619), uncle of Muhammad. His first name is believed to be Imran.
* Imran ibn Husain, was one of the Companions of Muhammad and a Narrator of hadith
'Amram see ‘Imran
‘Imran (in Hebrew, ‘Amram). Muslim authors mention two persons of this name, the first of whom appears in the Bible but not in the Qur‘an, the second vice versa. The first is the father of Moses, Aaron and Maryam (Exodus 6:20), the other the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus (Qur‘an 3:31). The last mentioned is also, according to the historians, the father of Elizabeth (in Arabic, Ashba‘), the mother of John the Baptist.
Imran is a male Arabic given name that means construction, prosperity, and happiness. It is a very popular first name throughout the Arab and Muslim World.
The name may refer to:
* Imran, the father of Mariam/Maryam in the Qur'an
o The Al-i-Imran, is the 3rd chapter of the Qur'an with two hundred verses
* Abu Talib ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (549-619), uncle of Muhammad. His first name is believed to be Imran.
* Imran ibn Husain, was one of the Companions of Muhammad and a Narrator of hadith
'Amram see ‘Imran
‘Imran ibn Shabin
‘Imran ibn Shabin (d. 979). Bandit lord of the swampy area on the lower course of the Euphrates and Tigris between
Kufa and Basra (in Arabic, al-bata‘ih).
Imru‘ al-Qays
Imru‘ al-Qays. By-name meaning “slave of (the god) Qays.” This by-name was used by several Arab poets. The most famous of them is Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr (Imru‘u‘l-Qais ibn Hujr), generally considered to have died around 550. Although remaining an obscure and semi-legendary personality, he has acquired a vaunted reputation. Some of his admirers in Basra credited him with the creation of the qasida. Among his poems the so-called Mu‘allaqa has aroused the most interest.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is said to have been a Bedouin chief’s son, and to have led a wandering (probably criminal) life attempting to recover his patrimony, lost at the dissolution of the confederation which his father headed. The Emperor Justinian summoned him to Constantinople to employ him in mobilizing the Arabs for war against Persia, but he died at Ankara, on his way back to Arabia. He is said to have been poisoned by the Emperor because of a liaison with a Byzantine princess.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is regarded as the greatest of the poets of the Jahiliyya (Age of Ignorance), as the Muslims call the pre-Islamic period. He is credited with a large body of poetry, among which is his celebrated Mu‘allaqa. This is a qasida (ode), and forms part of the collection of 7 odes (actually 10, as different odes are included in different texts) known as the Mu‘allaqat. The significance of this name, literally “suspended,” is unknown.
In any one poem a pre-Islamic poet has one basic object. It may be to praise himself, to praise his tribe or his patron, to beg for a reward, to taunt his enemies, or something else of this sort. Before doing so, however, he will give a lengthy description of the desert, a journey, his camel or his horse, and of other places, objects and situations familiar to his audience which will awaken response in them. Since his arm is to describe in new ways objects and situations similar to those described by his contemporaries, it is very difficult to translate the pre-Islamic poems satisfactorily.
The poetry of this period was later considered by the Arabs to be the only suitable model for their own. Poets would learn by heart an enormous amount of it, and would produce something almost indistinguishable from it. Poems of this sort continued to be composed long after the appearance of the “Modern” school, in spite of the criticism and ridicule of the “Moderns” and their partisans. Books like the Kitab al-Aghani (Book of Songs) must have served as valuable reference works for would be poets of the period.
Imru' al-Qais bin Hujr bin al-Harith Al-Kindi (Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr) (c.501-c.544) was an Arabian poet of the 6th century, the author of one of the Muallaqat, an anthology of pre-Islamic Arabic literature.
Imru' was the son of Hujr, the last king of Kindah. He was born around 501 and died around 544. His mother was Fatimah bint Rabi’ah, the sister of Kulayb and Al-Muhalhal, two well known Arab tribe leaders. Even though he was raised in luxury as a result of being the son of the king, he suffered because he was denied kingship after his father’s assassination. That is why Arabs called him al-Maliku 'ḍ-ḍillīl (the lost king or the king who has lost his throne).
He loved wine to such an extent that when he was informed of his father’s death during drinking, he shocked every one around him by his response when he said “Today is for wine and tomorrow is another matter” (al-yawma Khamr, wa ghadan ʼamr). It is believed that he avenged his father, although they had a bad relationship.
He wrote passionate love poetry, and is believed to have invented the Qasida, or classical Arabic ode. His verse was intensely subjective, like much of the poetry of the pre-Islamic period. He was assassinated by Emperor Justinian I, who sent him a poisoned cloak, after al-Qays had an affair with a princess at his court.
Slave of the god Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Slave of Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Imru‘ al-Qays. By-name meaning “slave of (the god) Qays.” This by-name was used by several Arab poets. The most famous of them is Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr (Imru‘u‘l-Qais ibn Hujr), generally considered to have died around 550. Although remaining an obscure and semi-legendary personality, he has acquired a vaunted reputation. Some of his admirers in Basra credited him with the creation of the qasida. Among his poems the so-called Mu‘allaqa has aroused the most interest.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is said to have been a Bedouin chief’s son, and to have led a wandering (probably criminal) life attempting to recover his patrimony, lost at the dissolution of the confederation which his father headed. The Emperor Justinian summoned him to Constantinople to employ him in mobilizing the Arabs for war against Persia, but he died at Ankara, on his way back to Arabia. He is said to have been poisoned by the Emperor because of a liaison with a Byzantine princess.
Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr is regarded as the greatest of the poets of the Jahiliyya (Age of Ignorance), as the Muslims call the pre-Islamic period. He is credited with a large body of poetry, among which is his celebrated Mu‘allaqa. This is a qasida (ode), and forms part of the collection of 7 odes (actually 10, as different odes are included in different texts) known as the Mu‘allaqat. The significance of this name, literally “suspended,” is unknown.
In any one poem a pre-Islamic poet has one basic object. It may be to praise himself, to praise his tribe or his patron, to beg for a reward, to taunt his enemies, or something else of this sort. Before doing so, however, he will give a lengthy description of the desert, a journey, his camel or his horse, and of other places, objects and situations familiar to his audience which will awaken response in them. Since his arm is to describe in new ways objects and situations similar to those described by his contemporaries, it is very difficult to translate the pre-Islamic poems satisfactorily.
The poetry of this period was later considered by the Arabs to be the only suitable model for their own. Poets would learn by heart an enormous amount of it, and would produce something almost indistinguishable from it. Poems of this sort continued to be composed long after the appearance of the “Modern” school, in spite of the criticism and ridicule of the “Moderns” and their partisans. Books like the Kitab al-Aghani (Book of Songs) must have served as valuable reference works for would be poets of the period.
Imru' al-Qais bin Hujr bin al-Harith Al-Kindi (Imru‘ al-Qays ibn Hujr) (c.501-c.544) was an Arabian poet of the 6th century, the author of one of the Muallaqat, an anthology of pre-Islamic Arabic literature.
Imru' was the son of Hujr, the last king of Kindah. He was born around 501 and died around 544. His mother was Fatimah bint Rabi’ah, the sister of Kulayb and Al-Muhalhal, two well known Arab tribe leaders. Even though he was raised in luxury as a result of being the son of the king, he suffered because he was denied kingship after his father’s assassination. That is why Arabs called him al-Maliku 'ḍ-ḍillīl (the lost king or the king who has lost his throne).
He loved wine to such an extent that when he was informed of his father’s death during drinking, he shocked every one around him by his response when he said “Today is for wine and tomorrow is another matter” (al-yawma Khamr, wa ghadan ʼamr). It is believed that he avenged his father, although they had a bad relationship.
He wrote passionate love poetry, and is believed to have invented the Qasida, or classical Arabic ode. His verse was intensely subjective, like much of the poetry of the pre-Islamic period. He was assassinated by Emperor Justinian I, who sent him a poisoned cloak, after al-Qays had an affair with a princess at his court.
Slave of the god Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Slave of Qays see Imru‘ al-Qays.
Inal
Inal (Aynal) al-Ajrud (b. 1381). Mameluke sultan of Egypt and Syria (r.1453-1461). During his reign, Mameluke troops intervened in dynastic troubles of the Lusignan in Cyprus, but suffered many losses.
Aynal see Inal
Ajrud, al- see Inal
Inal (Aynal) al-Ajrud (b. 1381). Mameluke sultan of Egypt and Syria (r.1453-1461). During his reign, Mameluke troops intervened in dynastic troubles of the Lusignan in Cyprus, but suffered many losses.
Aynal see Inal
Ajrud, al- see Inal
Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibn al-Emin (Ibn al-Emin Inal) (Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal) (1870-1957). Turkish biographer and writer. He was probably one of the last outstanding representatives of traditional Ottoman scholarship and erudition, ignoring the changes which were taking place around him. In 1940, he became an adviser to the Editorial Board of the Turkish edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam.
Ibn al-Emin Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibn al-Emin (Ibn al-Emin Inal) (Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal) (1870-1957). Turkish biographer and writer. He was probably one of the last outstanding representatives of traditional Ottoman scholarship and erudition, ignoring the changes which were taking place around him. In 1940, he became an adviser to the Editorial Board of the Turkish edition of the Encyclopedia of Islam.
Ibn al-Emin Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal Inal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
Inal, Ibnulemin Mahmud Kemal see Inal, Ibn al-Emin
‘Inan
‘Inan. Poetess of Baghdad. She is considered the first woman to have won literary fame under the ‘Abbasids. She played an important role as the center of a literary circle.
‘Inan. Poetess of Baghdad. She is considered the first woman to have won literary fame under the ‘Abbasids. She played an important role as the center of a literary circle.
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu (Inaya Abdullah Kanbu) (August 31, 1608, Bahranpur - September 23, 1671, Delhi). Author of a history of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan I.
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu was a Mughal historian, author of Tarikh-i Dil Kush, on the history of Djahan Shah and his predecessors (from the time of Adam) and Bahar-i Danish. He was the brother of Muhammad Sali Kanbu, author of Shahdjahannama (history Djahan Shah).
Kanbu, 'Inayat Allah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Kanbu, Inaya Abdullah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
‘Inayat Allah Kanbu (Inaya Abdullah Kanbu) (August 31, 1608, Bahranpur - September 23, 1671, Delhi). Author of a history of the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan I.
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu was a Mughal historian, author of Tarikh-i Dil Kush, on the history of Djahan Shah and his predecessors (from the time of Adam) and Bahar-i Danish. He was the brother of Muhammad Sali Kanbu, author of Shahdjahannama (history Djahan Shah).
Kanbu, 'Inayat Allah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Inaya Abdullah Kanbu see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Kanbu, Inaya Abdullah see ‘Inayat Allah Kanbu
Ince, Ozdemir
Ince, Ozdemir (Ozdemir Ince) (b. September 1 1936 Mersin), Turkish poet, writer, newspaper writer.
Ozdemir Ince see Ince, Ozdemir
Ince, Ozdemir (Ozdemir Ince) (b. September 1 1936 Mersin), Turkish poet, writer, newspaper writer.
Ozdemir Ince see Ince, Ozdemir
Independence of Malaya Party
Independence of Malaya Party (IMP). Founded as a multi-racial political party in September 1951 by Dato Onn bin Ja‘afar, who had resigned from the presidency of the United Malays National Organization because of its unwillingness to offer membership to non-Malays. Ja‘afar felt that a post-independence system made up of ethnic parties would aggravate ethno-nationalist tensions. Strong opposition from Malays, who feared that the IMP would diminish their political dominance, compelled previously supportive Chinese and Indian leaders to withhold their backing. Thus, the IMP was soundly beaten by the new Malay and Chinese Alliance Party, formed in response to the IMP’s concept of multi-racial parties, in the February 1952 Kuala Lumpur election. A noble experiment, the IMP never really enjoyed solid support, and it was dissolved in 1953.
The Independence of Malaya Party was a political party in British-ruled Malaya that stood for political independence. Founded by Onn Ja'afar after he left UMNO in 1951, it opposed the UMNO policy of Malay-supremacy.
The party was open to all races of Malaya, but received support mainly from Indians. After noticing that support for the party was unfavourable, Onn dissolved the party in 1953 and formed the Parti Negara.
IMP see Independence of Malaya Party
Independence of Malaya Party (IMP). Founded as a multi-racial political party in September 1951 by Dato Onn bin Ja‘afar, who had resigned from the presidency of the United Malays National Organization because of its unwillingness to offer membership to non-Malays. Ja‘afar felt that a post-independence system made up of ethnic parties would aggravate ethno-nationalist tensions. Strong opposition from Malays, who feared that the IMP would diminish their political dominance, compelled previously supportive Chinese and Indian leaders to withhold their backing. Thus, the IMP was soundly beaten by the new Malay and Chinese Alliance Party, formed in response to the IMP’s concept of multi-racial parties, in the February 1952 Kuala Lumpur election. A noble experiment, the IMP never really enjoyed solid support, and it was dissolved in 1953.
The Independence of Malaya Party was a political party in British-ruled Malaya that stood for political independence. Founded by Onn Ja'afar after he left UMNO in 1951, it opposed the UMNO policy of Malay-supremacy.
The party was open to all races of Malaya, but received support mainly from Indians. After noticing that support for the party was unfavourable, Onn dissolved the party in 1953 and formed the Parti Negara.
IMP see Independence of Malaya Party
Indo-Mauritians
Indo-Mauritians. The island of Mauritius lies in the western Indian Ocean, some 500 miles east of Madagascar and 20 degrees south of the equator. On its 720 square miles are nearly one million people, all descendants of immigrants who arrived, voluntarily or involuntarily, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. An independent country within the British Commonwealth since 1968, Mauritius is almost totally dependent on the production of sugar.
The Muslims of Mauritius came from the Indian subcontinent and make up about 17 percent of the total population, or 24 percent of the Indo-Mauritian population. By origin, they can be divided into two major groups: those whose ancestors came as indentured laborers between 1834 and 1907 from India’s United Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and the Tamil and Telegu speaking areas of southern India, and a smaller group of traders from the Gujarati speaking areas of west India, notably Kutch and Surat, most of whom arrived after World War I.
Indo-Mauritians. The island of Mauritius lies in the western Indian Ocean, some 500 miles east of Madagascar and 20 degrees south of the equator. On its 720 square miles are nearly one million people, all descendants of immigrants who arrived, voluntarily or involuntarily, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. An independent country within the British Commonwealth since 1968, Mauritius is almost totally dependent on the production of sugar.
The Muslims of Mauritius came from the Indian subcontinent and make up about 17 percent of the total population, or 24 percent of the Indo-Mauritian population. By origin, they can be divided into two major groups: those whose ancestors came as indentured laborers between 1834 and 1907 from India’s United Provinces, Bihar, Orissa, Bengal and the Tamil and Telegu speaking areas of southern India, and a smaller group of traders from the Gujarati speaking areas of west India, notably Kutch and Surat, most of whom arrived after World War I.
Inju
Inju (Injuids). Iranian family that wielded power in western Iran (1304-1357). "Inju" is a Mongol term referring to royal domains, and the family began as administrators of such property for the Ilkhan rulers. During the turmoil following the death of the last Ilkhan, Abu Said, in 1335, the Injuids struggled against several rivals to hold onto power in Shiraz and Isfahan. They eventually lost to the Muzaffarids. Some of the great fourteenth century poet Hafiz’s earliest poems praise the enlightened rule of the Injuids in Shiraz, which became the center of Iranian literary culture at that time.
Injuids see Inju
Inju (Injuids). Iranian family that wielded power in western Iran (1304-1357). "Inju" is a Mongol term referring to royal domains, and the family began as administrators of such property for the Ilkhan rulers. During the turmoil following the death of the last Ilkhan, Abu Said, in 1335, the Injuids struggled against several rivals to hold onto power in Shiraz and Isfahan. They eventually lost to the Muzaffarids. Some of the great fourteenth century poet Hafiz’s earliest poems praise the enlightened rule of the Injuids in Shiraz, which became the center of Iranian literary culture at that time.
Injuids see Inju
Inonu, Ismet
Inonu, Ismet (Ismet Inonu) (Mustafa İsmet İnönü) (September 24, 1884 – December 25, 1973). President of Turkey (1938-1950). During his presidency, he maintained Turkish neutrality during most of World War II.
Ismet was born on September 24, 1884, in Izmir to a middle class Kurdish family with ties to Malatya. He received a military education, graduating from the general staff academy as staff captain in 1906. He served with distinction in World War I, and after the defeat of the Ottoman regime he joined nationalist forces under Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) to fight for the establishment of the Turkish Republic. In 1921, Ismet defeated a Greek invasion force in two battles at Inonu, near Eskisehir in Anatolia, and later took the name of that village as his family name. As the nationalists‘ foreign minister (1921-24), he led the delegations to the Lausanne Conference (1922-23), at which the European powers recognized Ataturk’s government.
When the Turkish Republic was established in 1923, Ismet became its first premier, he was re-appointed in 1925, and held that office until 1937. Elected president when Ataturk died in 1938, he kept Turkey out of World War II until 1945, when he came in on the side of the Allies, preparing for Turkey’s later alignment with the West. Competitive party politics, which he inaugurated in 1946, led to Inonu’s defeat at the polls four years later.
Inonu then led the opposition against the Democratic Party until the party’s overthrow by the army in May 1960. After the 1961 elections, he served as prime minister in three coalition governments (1961-65), after which he returned to the opposition. He tried to revitalize his Republican People’s Party (RPP) by adopting a left of center image that he thought would appeal to Turkish voters of the late 1960s. However, he failed to win re-election in 1969 and was discredited by his support of the military regime that seized power in 1971. He resigned as party chairman in 1972 but remained a senator until his death in Ankara on December 25, 1973.
Inonu has been called a pragmatist, an optimist, and a “statesman par excellence.” Inonu’s main achievement was to lead Turkey from the system of benevolent despotism under Ataturk to a multi-party democracy. Inonu has today fallen into relative obscurity, but is, after Ataturk, one of the main architects behind today’s modern Turkey. Inonu was the man behind the development of Turkish democracy, the development of pluralism in politics and the development of the Turkish economy. Inonu will also be remembered for keeping Turkey neutral during most of World War II.
Ismet Inonu see Inonu, Ismet
Mustafa İsmet İnönü see Inonu, Ismet
Inonu, Mustafa İsmet see Inonu, Ismet
No comments:
Post a Comment