Akhbari
Akhbarism is a branch of Twelver Shia Islam, whose adherents do not perform emulation of an Islamic jurist. Akhbaris reject the use of intercessory reasoning via trained Islamic jurists to derive verdicts in Islamic law, maintaining it is forbidden to perform imitation of anyone but one of the Fourteen Infallibles of Twelver Islam. The vast majority of Akhbaris today are to be found in Bahrain, with notable minorities in Iraq, Kuwait and Tanzania.
The term Akhbari is derived from khabara'at, meaning “news” or “reports,” while Usuli comes from Uṣūl al-fiqh, the “principles of Islamic jurisprudence.” Akhbaris, in contrast to Usulis, do not accept Usul al-fiqh—that is, the effort to formulate a coherent set of legal principles based on rulings issued by the Imams prior to the Occultation of the last Imam.
Akhbaris hold that they must directly imitate the Ahl al-Bayt, arguing that the Imams are infallible whereas the marja, regardless of their expertise in jurisprudence, is not. Knowledge of religious rulings within Islamic jurisprudence is therefore transmitted, according to Akhbari belief, through successive generations of Muhaddith who narrate the rulings and hadith of The Fourteen Infallibles without engaging in interpretation. They maintain that the interpretation of the Qur'an and the full, esoteric knowledge of revelation are also handed down from the Imams in this manner.
As of the twenty-first century, Akhbari form a small minority within Shia Islam, with Usulis making up the mainstream majority. Akhbarism as a revivalist movement started with the writings of Muhammad Amin al-Astarabadi and achieved its greatest influence in the late Safavid and early post-Safavid era. However, shortly thereafter Muhammad Baqir Behbahani, along with other Usuli mujtahids, eradicated most of the Akhbari movement. South Asian regions notable for their Akhbari populations include Hyderabad, Karachi, Sehwan, Lahore, Faisalabad, Chakwaal, and Gojar Khan. with reportedly "only a handful of Shia Ulama remaining Akhbari to the present day."
Background
The foundational belief of Akhbarism is that only the aḥadīth of the Infallibles serve as authoritative evidence in Islam. Akhbaris consider themselves bound by the Hadith of the two weighty things, in which the Islamic prophet Muhammad instructed his followers to adhere to two sources of divine guidance after his death: the Quran and his progeny, the Ahl al-Bayt, whom Twelvers identify as the Twelve Imams.Accordingly, even during the Major Occultation, Akhbaris maintain that Muslims must continue to follow the traditions of the Ahl al-Bayt. They cite the statement attributed to Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi: “As for the new events that will occur, turn to the narrators of our traditions, because they are my proof to you, while I am the proof of Allah to them.” Akhbaris therefore reject fatāwa based on ijtihad and deny the permissibility of producing Qur'anic exegesis without quoting narrations from the infallible Ahlul-Bayt. They argue—citing the Hadith ath-Thaqalayn and reports from the Twelve Imams—that exegesis must rely exclusively on these authoritative traditions. Akhbaris also reject the generalization of Hadith, maintaining that individual Hadiths are either sound or unsound; moreover, they consider the hadith contained in The Four Books of the Shia tradition to be reliable.
It is reported that Imam Muhammad al-Mahdi acknowledged the reliability of Kitab al-Kafi and stated that “al-Kafi is sufficient for our Shia.”
Akhbaris argue that Usūlism introduced a new basis for Usul al-fiqh centuries after the Major Occultation, relying on hypothetical reasoning and scholarly assumptions. By contrast, early Shī‘a ulamā such as Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni and Ibn Babawayh focused primarily on the transmission of ḥadīth. During this period, Shī‘a scholars distinguished themselves from the Sunni tradition, which employed methods such as qiyas, while Shī‘a law was developed directly from the traditions of the Imams.
In the early Buyid period, Twelver ulamā believed that since the Imām had entered the Occultation and the Nā'ib al-Khass was no longer present, all functions vested in the Imām had effectively lapsed. These functions included:
- Leading the Holy War
- Distribution of the booty
- Leading the Friday Prayer
- Implementing judicial decisions
- Administering legal penalties
- Receiving religious taxes, including zakāt and khums.
In contrast to Usulis, Akhbaris believe that the perpetuity of Sharia resides exclusively with the infallibles. Thus, the right to interpret the Qur'an belongs only to the Fourteen Infallibles, who possess complete esoteric knowledge. While Usulis hold that jurisprudence develops over time through Uṣūl al-fiqh, Akhbaris seek religious rulings within Islamic jurisprudence exclusively from a living or deceased Muhaddith who transmits the rulings and hadith of The Fourteen Infallibles without interpretation. They further maintain that The Fourteen Infallibles never permitted Ijtihad.
History
Akhbaris argue that throughout the history of Twelver Shi'ism since the Occultation, Usuli ulama have gradually assumed functions that originally belonged to the Hidden Imam. They maintain that this process occurred in five distinct stages, each representing a further transgression or expansion of authority.First transgression
As early as the 5th century AH / 11th century CE—more than 150 years after the Occultation of the 12th Imām—Shaykhu t-Ta'ifa reinterpreted the doctrine to allow the delegation of the Imām's judicial authority to scholars trained in fiqh. In his writings, however, he stresses that this responsibility should be assumed by the ʿulamāʾ only when no other qualified individual is available.Shaykhu t-Ta'ifa also considered the ʿulamāʾ to be the most suitable figures to distribute religious taxes, given their knowledge of the rightful recipients. Nevertheless, he maintained that individuals were still permitted to distribute such taxes on their own if they wished. He likewise permitted fuqahāʾ to organize the Friday prayer in the absence of the Imām or his specific representative.
Prominent Shīʿa scholars who rejected this interpretation include:
- ʿAlam al-Huda
- Ibn Idris
- Allamah al-Hilli
Second transgression
Third transgression
Muhaqqiq al-Karkhi—writing roughly 300 years after the second transgression—was the first to argue, based on the hadith of ‘Umar ibn Hanzala, that the ulama served as the Nā'ib al-'Amm of the Hidden Imām. However, he limited the practical application of this idea to one specific area: assuming the responsibility of leading the Friday prayer.Fourth transgression
Shahīd ath-Thānī extended the concept of Nā'ib al-'Amm to its full implications within the religious sphere, applying it to all functions and prerogatives traditionally attributed to the Hidden Imām. As a result, the judicial authority of the ulama came to be viewed as a direct extension of the Imām’s authority. Payment of religious taxes to the ulama—as trustees of the Imām—thus became obligatory, and donors who chose to distribute these taxes independently were regarded as receiving no spiritual reward. This development contradicted the limitations established in earlier stages of doctrinal interpretation.Shahīd ath-Thānī also broadened the categories of individuals eligible to receive zakāt by including religious students and the ulama themselves, who were considered its rightful recipients as trustees for students. He further identified a role for the ulama in the sphere of defensive jihād, although he maintained agreement with Akhbari scholars that offensive jihād required the presence of the Hidden Imām and was therefore suspended during the Occultation.
Although these scholars were not mujtahids in the full technical sense, their contributions introduced new concepts into Shī‘a theology that later influenced the development of the exegetical school. However, their ideas were not widely accepted by leading Shī‘a scholars of the period and thus remained largely theoretical.
Traditional Shī‘a doctrine held that legitimate Islamic governance could only be established under the leadership of an infallible Imām. Consequently, Shī‘a communities historically played a limited role in supporting state authority, in contrast to the Sunni alignment with the Ottoman Empire. This stance created tension in regions where Shī‘a populations formed the majority. By the end of the Safavid era, pressures brought on by the rise of global imperialism intensified these concerns. In response, some ulama were encouraged to develop ideological frameworks that could extend state authority over the Shī‘a population by any necessary means.
The revival of Akhbārism—often termed “neo-Akhbārism”—emerged under the leadership of Yusuf Al Bahrani, dean of the scholarly community in Karbala. He spearheaded an intellectual critique of Usuli thought in the mid-18th century. A Bahrain-based Akhbari criticism of Usulism had already begun at the start of the 18th century, partly motivated by perceived weaknesses in the Usuli establishment supporting the Safavid state.
By assuming leadership of the Karbala scholarly community as one of the foremost thinkers of his time, al-Bahrani expanded this Bahrain-centered debate across the wider Shī‘a world.