Schools of thoughts within the zaydiyya

Asalamu 3lykum,

I have been seeking different historians and scholarly opinions from the twelvers and Sunnis about the zaydis. And I notice a prominent inconsistency between them and the scholars of zaydiyah. I see that they always talk about how zaydis split into jarudiyah and batriyah and so on, but when i talk to zaydi scholars they deny such differences and say that the only ones considered zaydis are the jarudis. Why is it that outside scholars always make this claim and why do zaydis deny it? If such a difference exists, what are the theological differences between the zaydi schools of thought?

Wa Alaikum Salam,

Whenever outsiders group different religious communities together, they tend to give them a single label. For example, all Christian denominations are called “Christians,” all Jewish denominations are called “Jews,” and so on. If you ask members of these different denominations who the “true” adherents are, you will almost always find that each group considers itself the true representative of the faith.The same phenomenon occurs within religious sects.Many groups have been classified under Zaydism based on general similarities in belief, which is why numerous sects have historically been counted as Zaydi. The same is true for Sunnis or Imamis, outsiders group various sub-groups together to categorize them.

False Jarudism, Batrism, and other such movements developed under the influence of Zaydism, but they were not Zaydism itself. Outsiders included them under the Zaydi label because some of their beliefs aligned with Zaydi thought, though they also held views that differed.When our scholars say that Batrism is not Zaydism but Jarudism is Zaydism, they do so based on the actual beliefs of these groups.

The main principle of Zaydism is following the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), who have maintained a coherent madhhab from the earliest times to the present. This madhhab is what we call Zaydism.Abu al-Jarud and al-Abtar were not from the Ahl al-Bayt, and therefore we do not follow them. It is incorrect to accuse us of being their followers, which is why we reject such claims.

You might ask: “Why, then, do you accept Jarudism, which is associated with Abu al-Jarud?”

The answer is that our A’immah (peace be upon them) themselves addressed this question. They explained that much of what is attributed to Jarudism by outsiders is based on misconceptions and falsehoods. The understanding of Zaydism as preserved by the Ahl al-Bayt is actually the original Shia madhhab of the Ahl al-Bayt, and Jarudism, in the sense is only a different name for the same school. In other words: true Zaydism equals true Jarudism = true Jarudism equals true Zaydism.

Relying on outsiders to understand specific religious groups will almost always lead to misunderstandings or misconceptions.
Think about it: from the perspective of many non muslims, Qadiyanis are considered Muslims, while no Muslim would accept them as such.

Wa Salam.

Asalamu alaykum,

Thank you for your reply.
Do you mind shedding light on batris and why they deferred from true Zaydism?

wa alaikum as-salam,

They deferred by holding to the belief that the Imamate of Abu Bakr and Umar are valid.

Here an excerpt from one of our books:

And the Batriyya, who are the followers of Kathir al-Abtar ibn al-Hasan ibn Salih ibn Hayy, said: “Ali alayhi as-salam is the best of the nation after its Prophet and the foremost in its governance. If he had refused their allegiance or fought them, it would have been permissible to shed their blood. But since he did not refuse their allegiance, this allegiance is commendable. As for the matter of ‘Uthman, it remains uncertain.” End of statement.

Similarly, the Salihiyya said that Hasan ibn Salih ibn Hayy, and those who follow his view regarding the Imamate, hold the same position. However, they added that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar are not blameworthy due to Ali alayhi as-salam remaining silent about his right, and the same applies to ‘Uthman until the Muslims repudiated him; afterward, the matter became uncertain.

I say: The Batriyya are the Salihiyya, because the Batriyya are named after Kathir ibn al-Hasan ibn Salih ibn Hayy, whom al-Mughira ibn Sa‘id called “al-Abtar,” and he was also Ibn al-Tammar. The Salihiyya are named after Hasan ibn Salih ibn Hayy. Thus, it becomes clear that the Salihiyya believed in the validity of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar’s Imamate based on Ali’s alayhi as-salam silence, his giving them his due rights, like a man consenting to waive a right, not that the choice itself makes an Imam an Imam.
[Excerpt from عدة الأكياس في شرح الأساس لعقائد الاكياس]

Imam Mansurbillah Abdullah Ibn Hamza alayhi as-salam, one of the great Aimmah alayhim as-salam said:
As for what pertains to the chapter on the Zaydis at the beginning of the treatise: they are divided into three groups, Batriyya, Salihiyya, and Jarudiya. The majority are Jarudiya, who are the people of truth, while the others have erred in some aspects of belief.

In another place he alayhi as-salam said:
They (Jarudiyya proper) are not the Jarudiya mentioned in al-Milal wa al-Nihal and in the books of the compilers of sects, who claim to excommunicate the Companions, and those who pledged allegiance to anyone before Ali and ‘Umar.
[Excerpt from مجموع رسائل الإمام المنصور بالله عبد الله بن حمزة]

The scholar and mujtahid Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ‘Awad, hafidhaullah, wrote in Min Thimar al-‘Ilm wa al-Hikma / Volume 3:

“As for dividing the Zaydis into three sects, Jarudiya, Batriyya, and Salihiyya, we know of these sects and their followers only from the books on sects. What we know today is the Zaydi doctrine as it exists now, and it is well-known. Their old and new books exist across countries, and heritage libraries are filled with them worldwide. There is nothing in them beyond the Zaydi doctrine as it exists today.

“Thus, our doctrine in creed and jurisprudence is well-known and established, impossible to conceal. Zaydi heritage books are numerous and widely distributed around the world; European libraries are full of Zaydi heritage books. Despite many manuscripts taken from Yemen, Yemeni libraries, both public and private, still abound with heritage books. Today, the Zaydi school of jurisprudence is widely known as the school of al-Hadi alayhi as-salam. As we previously mentioned, all Zaydi Imams rely in jurisprudence, after the Qur’an, first on the reports of Imam Zayd ibn Ali alayhi as-salam, second on the reports of his grandson Ahmad ibn ‘Isa ibn Zayd, and then on the reports of other transmitters among our Imams alayhim as-salam, we are thus Zaydi Hadawiyya.”