The Concept of “Rokn-e Rabe” in Sheykhism School and its Criticism by “Sheykhieh Hamadani”

Author:
Mohsen Hasani Sadi
Level:
Master
Subject(s):
Islamic Denominations
Language:
Farsi
Faculty:
Faculty of Islamic Denominations
Year:
2011
Publisher:
URD Press
Supervisor(s):
Mahdi Farmanian
Advisor(s):
Ez Aldein Reza Nejad

“Forth Pillar”( rokn-e-rabe) is one of the issues raised by shaykhia that led to the creation of a new word in the Shiite beliefs literature and it became one of the most important reason to separate a group from the main body of Shias. Raising this topic, it made different comments and a lot of discussion around it and a lot of meeting were organized to defend or reject and explain about it in the Theological centers. This research is about the different understanding of this word between two groups of shaikhia. Restricting the definition of the “Forth Pillar” (rokn-e-rabe) that has been mentioned as the friendship and understanding of scholars utterly Imams’ successor, and an abstruse expressing of  this definition, and raising the words “perfect shia” (Shia kamel) and “unique speaker” (nateq vahed), Kerman shaikhia limited this definition to just one of the shaikhi’s scholars. This definition is criticized by Hamadan shaikhia. This research tries to review and mention the definition of “forth pillar” (rokn-e-rabe) using the Kerman shaikhia’s resource and the criticisms, using the Hamadan shaikhia’s resource. Hamadan shaikhia believes what elites said is different from the expression of the “unique speaker” (nateq vahed) . they called this quotation as an innovation in religion  and deviation of shaikhia elites’ beliefs and astray and heterodox. And they say: “for our elites the “Forth Pillar” (rokn-e-rabe) means the cognition of the Narrators of  Imams’ and religious leaders’ words.  Haj Abd-ol-Karim not only don’t believe in the “unique speaker” (nateq vahed) but also in his opinion it is not necessary to be supreme and erudition  in the universe and we can obey someone who is not supreme too. So they know this belief as an innovation by Mohammad Khan Kermani and express a lot against him, and knowing themselves as a real interpreter of shaikh’s and sayed’s and Mohammad Karim Khan’s comments, they have defended this definition and generalized it to their other elites’ comments.