I merely wanted to prove a point, that they declared Imamate for themselves while remaining aloof from politics. Much like Zayn-ul-Abidin
So you openly reject the teaching of the Imams from Imam Baqir onwards? You reject the principle of designation? Even though thats how Imam Ali was made the Imam. Nass is closer to the Quranic view of the succession of the prophets rather than the ijma or the leader-must-pick-up-sword-and-fight-for-the-khalifate-doctine.
To say you cannot accept an Imam who does not impose himself on people is thinking over-simplistically. Imposing yourself / seizing political power is not the only way to convince others of a belief. The later imams never denied their imamate despite their encirclement by the state, and neither did they stop inviting people to accept their imamate and guiding those who wishing to be guided.
Wasil bin Ata is no real rightful authority, not on us, and neither i guess on you. He denied that Imams were necessary, thats why his school is considered sunni.
Haters gonna hate. What find annoying about them is that claim to be Shia and yet deny the teachings of Imam Jafar Sadiq . Thats like eating the biryani but leaving the drumstick.
So you will reject the Imams because muta is unacceptable in your modern-culture-influenced personal worldview . Maybe the problem lies within your heart that you cant accept such a revolutionary change in society. To accept this you'd have to destroy the idols within, you'd have to go against that part of your ego which was raised and pampered by the society you live in.
Edited by JimJam, 17 July 2010 - 05:48 AM.