Journal of Razavi Culture

Abstract From the first centuries AH, Iran has been the destination of a large number of Imamzadegan [offspring or descendants of an imam] and there are many courts in different parts of the land that are attributed to them. Among them, there are imamzadegan to whom more than one court is attributed; among them is Imamzadeh Hoseim ibn Musa ibn Jaʿfar, the brother of Imam Riḍā (as) who, according to some sources, had left for Iran with a group of Sādāt [descendants of an imam] and his another brother, Ahmad, following his brother's guardianship. Among the various sites attributed to him, the two views on his burial in Tabas and Shiraz are more famous. The purpose of this study is to analyze and review the narrations related to the burial of this imamzadeh in Shiraz and in this way, a descriptive-analytical method has been used. Considering that the existing reports go back to the later sources, ie the 14th-14th lunar centuries, and on the other hand, the numerous problems that are observed in them, it is a mistake to consider Hosein ibn Musa among Ahmad ibn Musa's companions and the city of Shiraz as his burial place.

Abstract Like the biography of many descendants of the Imams of Shi'a, the biography of Ḥusain ibn Mūsā al-Kazim, the brother of the eighth Imam (A.S.) is somewhat obscure. There are several views about his burial place. According to the famous report, he was buried in the city of Ṭabas. The views on this subject are based on documents that one of which is a letter attributed to Imām Riẓā (A.S.). This letter was addressed to the governor of Ṭabas. It seems that the letter was written about Ḥusain ibn Mūsā. The letter reads, “A twelve years old youth from the family of the prophet, named Husain, wanted to go to Ṭabas and settle in the city”. The writer of the letter wanted the Ruler to help find the young boy. The letter asks the Ruler to inform the Imam as soon as he finds the boy. This paper examines the validity of such a letter from the Imam. Using descriptive-analytic method, the letter's document and its content are reviewed. The results revealed some errors in this letter: a) The unity of the report; b) quoted text of the letter in a later resource; c) the unknown identity of Āmir ibn Zurwāmihr; d) the inconsistency of the age of Husain with some historical reports; and e) the literary issues and some spelling problems in the text of the letter.