Heresy of Yarsanism

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الامين

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

The seventh century Muslim Arabs introduced Islam to many parts of the Old World, including the former realm of the Sassanian Empire, the lands of Iran and Khorasan. The Iranian peasants in particular viewed the Muslim Arab conquest of Iran as a liberation, as previously they were oppressed under the tyranny and yoke of the Zoroastrian priesthood and landed aristocracy. But while many of the Iranians converted to Islam, there were others who held out and resisted conversion. Some Sassanian remnants established the Dabuyid dynasty that maintained the independence of Tabaristan, the northern region of Iran on the southern border of the Caspian Sea. But the Abbasids conquered this territory and ended the Zoroastrian Dabuyid state during the reign of al-Mansur. While considering themselves part of the Muslim milieu, there was resentment from some Iranians toward the Arabs who had conquered and subjugated them. Several false prophets emerged among them who blended elements of Islam with the ancient Iranian, or Zoroastrian, religion, especially the concept of dualism. These nativist false prophets and heresiarchs like Bihafaridh, Ustadhsis, Babak, Sunpadh, al-Muqanna, Ishaq al-Turk and several others led revolts against the Abbasid government and appealed to Zoroastrian motifs in rallying people to their cause. Along with the influence of Zoroastrian dualism, there were elements of Eastern Christianity and Gnosticism in these heretical nativist movements. This is from where the heresies of hulul (God incarnating or manifesting in a human) tanasukh (reincarnation or metempsychosis) came from which characterized these nativist movements. They were also characterized by antinomianism, meaning a rejection of the Islamic Shari’ah and the Pillars of Islam like offering the five daily Salah, fasting in Ramadan, etc.

These Zoroastrian, Eastern Christian, Gnostic and even Shaman influences continued to animate later heresies that emerged from the Iranic Muslim civilization. The heresy of hulul, best typified in the Christian doctrine of the incarnation of God in Jesus, was taught by one such heresy known as Yarsanism. The Yarsanis, also called Kaka’is and Ahle Haq, believe that a certain late medieval Kurdish figure, Sultan Sahak, was an incarnation of God. They likewise believe that Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, was an incarnation of God, which explains why they are sometimes called Ali-Illahis, although that name would encompass other heretical groups too like the Nusayris and other Ghali Shi’ites. Yarsanis believe in reincarnation or transmigration of the soul, and have a dualist worldview. They are a highly secretive cult, and often attempt to camouflage themselves when mixing with the broader Muslim society. However, they are clearly not Muslim nor do they identify as Muslim. They have their own rites, such as undertaking a pilgrimage to the tomb of Sultan Sahak and fasting for three days in the solar Persian calendar month of Aban. They have their own sacred text called the Saranjam. Like the Parsis, Mandaeans, Yazidis, Druze, Alawites, Zikris and Baha’is the Yarsanis do not practice circumcision. This rejection of circumcision is a main physical difference between most of these heretical cults that emerged after Islam and orthodox Muslims. It is highly significant in demonstrating how they embrace antinomianism and reject the Abrahamic Covenant. The same principle may be extended to other Islamic prohibitions that are broken by Yarsanis and other heretics, like eating pork and drinking alcohol, and for a lady to expose her hair and body parts that are meant to be concealed. When and where these heretics do observe such Islamic strictures, it is not for religious reasons but out of cultural and social conformity to the broader Muslim society they find themselves in. The Yarsanis are predominantly Kurdish. The Kurdish population has a long history of heresy and opposition to the beliefs and ways of the rest of the Muslim Ummah. Many of the early Muslim Kurds were not normative Sunnis but rather Mushabbihah (anthropomorphists), believing that Allah resembles His creation in some way. While today most Kurds are Sunni Muslims, there is the enormous influence of Marxism and ethnic nationalism and separatism upon the community. Kurdish factions that have fuelled insurgencies in the region, like the PKK and PYD/YPG, are heavily influenced by Marxism but also secularism, anarchism, feminism, egalitarianism and pluralism. It would be difficult to classify those who are strongly committed to the ideology of these leftist factions as Muslims, but blanket takfir must be avoided. Takfir of individuals connected to such parties and factions can only be made on a case by case basis. Nevertheless, the call for an independent Kurdistan is one that is echoed by the enemies of Islam—the Zionists. Some Kurdish separatists likewise openly declare their support for the so-called State of Israel. Zionists support the breakup of Pakistan and the establishment of an independent Baluchistan. Like the Kurdish insurgency, the Baluch separatist insurgency is also heavily influenced by secular Marxism. At the moment, Kurdish and Baluch separatism present a lethal danger to the Ummah, and the governments of Pakistan, Turkey and Syria must not to tolerate them for a second.

Know that when a dubious Muslim makes statements decrying “Arab imperialism” or “Arabization” and the supposed wrongs of the early Muslim Arabs who conquered territories from which their ancestors belonged, it is probable such an individual is a hypocrite, an apostate or a heretic. For what they intend by “Arabization” are the practices of orthodox Sunni Islam—for men to adapt an appearance associated with the Arab Muslims (wearing a long robe, skullcap and having a full beard with trimmed moustache), and for women to adapt the appearance associated with the Arab Muslim ladies (the hijab, burqa, niqab, covering the head, face and entire body with a veil). Allah initially chose the Arabs and sent His final Prophet, peace be upon him, an Ishmaelite Arab, with the manifest destiny of conquering the Holy Land and the surrounding countries including Iran, Anatolia, Egypt, North Africa, Transoxiana and India. Hence, it was meant for these conquered territories to be “Arabized” to some extent at least, for there to be an outward manifestation of Islamic identity and unity. What these nativists and natonalists decry as “Arabization”, especially the outer appearance of the orthodox Muslim, serves the critical aim of distinguishing us from especially the heretics being discussed here—Yarsanis, Yazidis, Druze, Isma’ilis, Alawites, Alevis, Bektashis, Zikris, Baha’is and so many others. Yarsani and Druze men are known to keep overgrown moustaches, and it is an obvious means through which they are distinguished from Muslims. Likewise, all these heretical factions reject the burqa or full veiling that is deeply and primarily associated with orthodox Muslim ladies. When modernist, liberal and otherwise ignorant Muslims object to the emphasis of an “Arabized” dress and appearance, claiming such a practice is nowhere spelled out or ordained in the Quran or even the Hadith, they are totally overlooking the critical importance distinction in dress and appearance played throughout the history of Islam. Their adoption of Western/European fashion and general appearance would shock and disturb the pre-modern Muslim, for whom distinction from not only originally non-Muslim communities but also many of the heretical sects under discussion was taken for granted and implicitly understood. Without maintaining the distinction in physical appearance between Muslims and non-Muslims, the Ummah’s continued existence in any meaningful way is jeopardized considerably. It is necessary for Muslim governments to do what they can to stamp out these heretical cults (Yarsanis, Yazidis, Druze, Nizaris, Alawites, Alevis, Bektashis, Ali-Ilahis, Zikris, Baha’is and Ahmadis), and eventually eradicate them altogether. As we are presently witnessing in Syria, some of these heretics are openly serving the Zionists and are extremely violent, engaged in shedding the blood of Muslims. Others certainly have the potential of doing so too if circumstances permit. But virtually all of the premodern heretical groups are thankfully not involved in proselytism, which is why our Sunni Ulama have generally neglected addressing them as aggressively as they have dealt with the Ahmadi/Qadiani heresy of the false prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Apart from the issue of proselytism, the Sunni Ulama have devoted more effort against the Ahmadi/Qadiani heresy because the latter deceptively pose as Muslims far more successfully than any other heretical group. But now considering the danger the other heretical cults pose in terms of sectarian violence, rebellion against the state, and active collaboration with the Zionists and other external enemies of Islam, it is necessary for the Sunni Ulama to expose them also in the field of polemics.