Critique of the Claim of Multiple Yamani Figures

Dar al-Hedayah | One of the claims of the faction of the claimant Yamani is the multiplicity of this personality. In reality, this movement tries to prove in a way that the Yamani is not one personality but multiple personalities. This claim has been made while there are numerous errors in this belief. This article critiques this claim.

 One Yamani or Several Yamani!?

Given that the Yamani is one of the definite signs (alamat al-hatm) of the appearance (zuhur), the possibility of its multiplicity does not exist. This is because in that case, there would be no benefit in introducing it as a sign, as it would be impossible to identify the intended instance.

When the followers of Ahmad al-Basri realized that the narrations indicate the emergence of the Yamani from “Yemen” and their Imam is from “Basra”, they tried to justify the multiplicity of the Yamani from among some narrations and their own fabricated justifications as a rationale for their Imam being from Basra.

Haydar al-Ziyadi, one of Ahmad al-Basri’s followers, says in this regard:

“Through the narrations of the Ahl al-Bayt (as), it becomes clear that the personality of the Yamani in the narrations is multiple and mentioned with different wordings, and each time we become aware of one aspect of the matter. Therefore, it is specified that the Yamani who comes from Yemen is someone other than the specific Yamani of the Imam (as) whom the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and Imam al-Baqir (as) mentioned and about whom they said: ‘The one who turns away from him is in the Fire.’ And he is the right hand of Imam al-Mahdi (aj) and the leader of his armies, and he is the same master who takes the pledge of allegiance (bay’ah) from the people for the Imam. Consequently, the Yamani is the leader of the armies and the right hand of Imam al-Mahdi (aj). Just as the revolutions of the Family of Muhammad (as) were a preparation for Imam al-Qa’im (aj), therefore these revolutions are ‘Yamaniyyah’ (Yamani-like); because they are attributed to the Yamani, and the leader and cause of the revolution is the Yamani who is attributed to the Ahl al-Bayt (as). Likewise, whoever is attributed to the Sufyani will be Sufyani. From here, we realize that the 313 companions of Imam al-Mahdi (aj) are also Yamani, and that too based on their attribution to their leader, the Yamani, because he is the first of them and their master. Therefore, if any one of them establishes a revolution, it is called ‘the Yamani Revolution’. Consequently, the matter is not hidden from one who observes the narrations of the multiplicity of the Yamani. And if the specific Yamani, the allegiance-taker, comes, the one who turns away from him is from the people of the Fire, and he is a proof (hujjah) from the proofs of Allah on his land and is infallible.”

Al-Yamani al-Maw’ud Hujjat Allah, P. 107

 Response to the Misconception

In response to this misconception, it must be said: In addition to there being no evidence for it, that Yamani whose emergence from Yemen the narrations point to is a definite sign of the appearance (zuhur). In no narration is there any reference to another Yamani who emerges during the era of the appearance (zuhur).

The laughable point in Haydar al-Ziyadi’s statement is where he says: The Yamani is the leader of Imam al-Zaman’s (as) army, and the leader of the Yamani’s army is another Yamani. Really, how can human reason accept that the Yamani assumes the responsibility of leading Imam al-Zaman’s (as) army and abandons the army that is specific to him? Where has such a thing been mentioned? It seems they have forgotten that their audience are rational human beings. If the Yamani in the era of the appearance has a specific army, he should be the leader of his own army, not also become the leader of another army at the same time.

The more interesting point in Haydar al-Ziyadi’s statement is where he says: All 313 followers of Imam al-Zaman (as) are Yamani because they are attributed to their leader, the Yamani. Therefore, if any one of them rises up, it is considered a Yamani uprising. Obviously, there is no evidence that the Yamani is from among the 313 companions of Imam al-Zaman (as). So, with this, how will the Yamani be their leader? Even if we accept that the Yamani is one of the 313, why are the companions attributed to the Yamani and not attributed to Imam al-Zaman (as), while Imam al-Zaman (as) is the leader of both the Yamani and the 313?

In addition to the point we made, we say: What is the importance of attributing the companions of Imam al-Zaman (as) to the Yamani? Why should we describe them and the revolution of Imam al-Mahdi (as) in terms of being “Yamani”? Such misconceptions are found in the statements of most of Ahmad al-Basri’s followers and their Imam. It is a statement not based on any reason or transmission, and does not deserve examination and critique at all.