Batrīyya or Butrīyya (Arabic: بترية, adjective form Batrī) is an early branch of Zaydī Islam.
The Batrīyya were a group of moderates who emerged in Kūfah and played a significant role in the formation of early Zaydism in the 8th century. They held positions similar to those of Zayd ibn ʿAlī, and their theological positions and practices represented a middle ground between radical Shīʿa factions and proto-Sunnism. The Batrīyya were instrumental in shaping the early Zaydī movement alongside Jārūdīyya, which embraced the activist agenda of other Shīʿī groups.[1]
Historical Context
The Batrīyya emerged in the milieu of early Islamic sectarian development. They were contemporaries of the Jārūdīyya, with both groups contributing to the establishment of Zaydism.
The Zaydīyya ultimately became a major branch of Shīʿa Islam, known for their unique blend of theological and political doctrines.
Political Views
The Batrīyya held distinct views on several key political issues:
The Batrīyya believed that ʿAlī designated al-Ḥasan as the imām after his death, and that al-Ḥasan subsequently designated al-Ḥusayn. After that, the imām was not chosen by designation but by merit among their descendants. Any descendant of al-Ḥasan or al-Ḥusayn who took up arms and called people to the path of God, demonstrating knowledge, justice and virtue, was recognized as the imām. The Batrīyya also allowed for the possibility that the world may be without an imām, or that there may be multiple imāms at the same time. They argued that since it was possible for the world to be without a prophet, it was thus possible for it to be without an imām. Additionally, as there could be multiple prophets at one time, there could also be multiple imāms. They also supported the imāmate of a "person of lesser excellence" if necessary.[3]
Zayd ibn ʿAlī explained the concept of a man of lesser excellence, or al-mafḍūl, serving as imām by noting that, although ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib was the most distinguished of the Companions, the caliphate was entrusted to Abū Bakr. This decision was based on considerations of expediency, religious factors, and the fact that the people’s hearts were not yet ready to fully accept ʿAlī’s leadership at that time.[4]
Legitimacy of the First Two Caliphs
The Batrīyya accepted the legitimacy of the first two caliphs, Abū Bakr and ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, arguing that ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib's lack of objection constituted tacit approval of their rule:
"We consent to whom he consented to, for it is unlawful for us to do otherwise."[5] In comparison to the Jārūdīyya who claimed that "anyone, who pushed ʿAlī away from that position, was blasphemous; and that the community was blasphemous and misguided when it abstained from giving the allegiance to him".[6]
"When we hear traditions in ʿUthmān's favour and hear that he is one of the ten to whom Paradise is promised, we admit that we must acknowledge the soundness of his islām and his faith, and that he is one of those who will go to Paradise; but when we look at his deeds, such as his negligence in failing to discipline the Umayyads and the Banū Marwān, or his autocratic behaviour contrary to the ways of the Companions, we feel obliged to say, we must declare him an unbeliever. We are, therefore, uncertain about him; so we suspend judgment, and refer the matter to the best of Judges."[7]
Legal Views
Knowledge and Legal Authority
The Batrīyya did not attribute exclusive religious knowledge to the Prophet’s family but recognized the validity of knowledge transmitted within the broader Muslim community. They permitted the use of individual reasoning (ijtihād) and analogy (qiyās) in establishing the law.[8] This aligned them with early proto-Sunnī traditions.
The Batrīyya permitted ʿAlids to study under various non-ʿAlid scholars, including those who emphasized the exclusive legal authority of teachings from the Prophet’s Companions. Their acknowledgment of the moral integrity of all the Companions reinforced their commitment to these traditions as legitimate sources of religious knowledge. Since this knowledge was considered learned rather than divinely inspired, candidates for the Imāmate were required to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the law and its foundational texts. This approach to knowledge was also consistent with the proto-Sunnī perspectives of the early eighth century.[9]
Ritual Practices
The Batrīyyas maintained ritual practices in line with Kūfan traditionalism, such as "substitute shoe-rubbing" (masḥ ʿalā’l-khuffayn) and the consumption of eel and date wine.[10]
Theological Beliefs
The Batrīyya were critical of several beliefs held by other Shīʿa groups:[11]
Rajʿa (Return): They rejected the doctrine that certain figures would return from the dead before the Resurrection.
Taqiyya (Dissimulation): They opposed the practice of hiding one’s true beliefs in the face of persecution. Application of taqiyya differed greatly: A Kūfan named ʿUmar b. Riyāḥ visited al-Bāqir; in Medina and asked a question about ritual law that he had previously asked a year earlier. This time, however, al-Baqir gave a ruling that contradicted his earlier decision. When ʿUmar challenged him to explain the inconsistency, the imām referred to taqiyya. ʿUmar was not convinced and pointed out the absence of any external threat that would justify dissimulation. He then reported the incident to some of his colleagues in Kūfah, who subsequently converted to Batrī Zaydism.
Badāʾ (Change in Divine Will): Batrīs were critical of the concept of badāʾ, which refers to a change in divine will due to historical circumstances. For instance, during the disputed succession following Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq’s death, some Shīʿa used this idea when his expected successor, his eldest son Ismāʿīl, predeceased him. Heresiographers underline that many of al-Ṣādiq’s followers who rejected this explanation and became Batrīs.
Batrī vs. Jārūdī Zaydism
The terms "Batrī" or "Jārūdī" refer to theological orientations rather than distinct, identifiable groups.[12]
Zaydīyya initially was not a Shīʿī religious subdivision.[14] This can also be seen from the backing Zayd ibn ʿAlī received. Many leading scholars including Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 767), eponym of Sunnī Ḥanafī school of law, supported Zayd ibn ʿAlī in 740.[15]
Zayd ibn ʿAlī was moderate in his views on the succession of the Prophet, he refused to condemn the first two caliphs, ʾAbū Bakr and ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb and, contrary to many Shīʿī groups, accepted the religious authority of non-ʿAlid scholars, such as his teacher Wāṣil b. ʿAṭā.[16]
Historians consider the supporters of Zayd and his son Yaḥyā to be Batrī as they were Kūfan traditionists (proto-Sunnī) and supported ʿAlid military uprisings and political claims.[17]
Following the failed rebellion in Kūfah, Yaḥyā fled to Khorāsān with a few of his father's remaining supporters. He stayed in hiding, moving between different locations, until he was eventually captured by the Umayyads in Balkh and imprisoned in Marw, the provincial capital. After his release from prison, Yaḥyā eventually made his way back to Nīshāpūr and fought his first battle against Umayyads. Later, he moved on to Jūzjān and was ultimately killed in another battle.[20]
Muḥammad b. ʿAbdallāh al-Nafs al-Zakiyya and His Brother Ibrahim
Al-Nafs al-Zakiyya and Ibrāhīm were distant nephews of Zayd ibn ʿAlī. Muḥammad b. ʿAbdallāh (al-Nafs al-Zakiyya) was seen as a caliph from a young age and many called him "al-Mahdī".[21]
Al-Nafs al-Zakiyya's father secured allegiance for his son Muḥammad, and the brothers built a network that was far-reaching. ʿAbbāsid caliph al-Manṣūr searched for the brothers as they went underground during the ʿAbbāsid revolution. In 763, the brothers reemerged and revolted. Al-Nafs al-Zakiyya named himself the legitimate imām and took control of Madīnah, while his brother took control of Baṣrah. Both forces were defeated and the brothers were killed by the end of the year.[22]
The revolt is significant as it is the first time a distinct Zaydī identity can be tracked in history. Ibrahim observed chants of "We are the Zaydīs and the sons of Zaydīs" though he corrected those saying they should just call themselves Muslims.[23]
Yaḥyā b. ʿAbd Allāh and His Brother Idrīs
Within the Zaydīyya context, Yaḥyā and Idrīs's significance is based on the fact that they were integral in the "Jārūdīzation" of Zaydism.[24]
Yaḥyā and his brother Idrīs grew up in the household of the sixth Twelver Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq,[25] and Yaḥyā's ritual orthopraxy was thus influenced by Imāmism. In fact, Kūfan Zaydīs' substitute shoe-rubbing and drinking of date wine led to Yaḥyā's refusal to lead them in group prayers.[26]
Yaḥyā's influence grew even more once he received a caliphal pardon along with a large sum of money that allowed him to move freely, support ʿAlids, and rebuilt Zaydī networks.[27]
Decline and Legacy
After years of being relentlessly pursued by the ʿAbbāsids,[28] the Kūfan traditionalism was absorbed into Sunnism by the 9th century, and the views of the Jārūdīyya came to dominate Zaydī thought.[29]
Despite this, the Batrīyya's influence persisted in the broader development of Shīʿī and Zaydī theology. Their moderate positions on succession, legal authority, and communal knowledge reflect an important phase in the evolution of Islamic sectarianism.
van Ess, Josef. Theology and Society in the Second and Third Centuries of the Hijra. Volume 1: A History of Religious Thought in Early Islam. Translated by John O’Kane, Brill, 2016, pp. 274-308, https://brill.com/display/title/31888.
Haider, Najam. "Zaydism." Handbook of Islamic Sects and Movements, edited by Muhammad Afzal Upal and Carole M. Cusack, BRILL, 2021,pp. 203-11, https://brill.com/display/title/57054.
Madelung, Wilferd. "Zaydiyya." The Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition, edited by P. J. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, and Wolfhart Heinrichs, vol. XI, BRILL, 2002, pp. 477-81.
Madelung, Wilferd, and Paul Walker. An Ismaili Heresiography: The “Bāb al-Shayṭān” from Abū Tammāms’ Kitāb al-Shajara. Brill, 1998, pp. 88-94, https://brill.com/display/title/1379.
