Ali bin Hussein

@Mohamad Abdel-Hamid Thank you for debating. I took the time to relook at 12er. Which was sparked from your answers. And although I still disagree with your aqeeda. I feel there is no point debating as there is still alot of truth within your madhab. And more need is required for everyone to look critically at there own sect to see where they can correct rather than pointing the finger. I'm going to move away from Shia chat for a while to continue research.

Do your research ask Shia scholars questions. Shia is a broad term. There are 12er, Zaidi ismali, 12er reformist etc A few sites to check: https://www.al-islam.org/ http://www.salvationark.com/salvationark1/index.php/forum/index https://zaidiportal.com/ All of them have a question section where you are free to ask.

I don't think there are many Sunni left on this forum to answer questions.

1) No not in the sense of Nas direct appointment is not necessary. 2) Infallibility is not required. We say it's the Imam should not be a sinner but they are fallible do the possibility of sin is there. 3) We currently have no Imam. So I would like your proofs for points 1&3 If you have already mentioned them..I apologise for asking to repeat it.

This is good. As it strengthens your argument if you combine it with 12er hadith it gives corroboration and it paints a picture that is easier to follow even for a layman. Ill look into the hadith Please mention the other hadith of 12 found in Sunni books. As it will be something important for me to.look into. *Also it's not that I'm refusing to except exclusive 12er hadith. I would accept but you need to proove they are mutawatir.

So these are the pints you mentioned of why you accept 12er tafseer. *Note these should have been in your opening statement rather than the verses of 12 tribes and months. So the points. 2) I guess we already discussed this with the verse of ulil Amr. We disagreed it will be worth returning to it later. Point 1&2 where is your evidence so we can accept these points ?

Ok so next verse is clearly about month absolutely nothing indicates Imamat. We would need to go to 12er tafsir. As you mentioned with the previous verse 12 tribes. The reason you accept the tafsir was because of the 3 conditions you gave to accept Imami shiasm. So both the verses of 12 tribes and 12 months can not be used as evidence as you must already accept the 3 conditions you mentioned. Otherwise it's circular reasoning. So in conclusion those 2 verses can not be used as evidence in this debate unless you can indepently give a reason to accept the tafseer.

Maybe specifics was lacking but it was a fair assumption in a debate between 12er and Zaidi. Maybe you guys want to start again. With more defined debate conditions. ?

Can you give evidence that this broader term reffers to Ahlulbayt mentioned in hadith thaqlain ? As linguistically Ahlulbayt in its broadest sense can even include any one of the house wives, servants etc. But as Shia we take a specific meaning.

Haha no need to apologise. I have respect for my Sunni or 12er brothers. Now if you called me Sufi or irfani I'd probably get a little annoyed

This is the answer Imam Rassi society gave (A Zaidi group). Q] In Zaydiyya is Wilayah of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) considered part of Usul Al Deen? If it is, does this mean someone is not mu'min and does not go to heaven without believing in it? A] wa alaykum as salaam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu! Thank you for your question! This one is a bit more difficult to answer. The earliest Zaydi imams held to the belief in the wilaya as a precondition of belief. Imam al-Haadi (عليه السلام) said in his Ahkaam very explicitly that the term 'belief' cannot be applied to one who doesn't accept the wilaya.Imam ar-Rassi (عليه السلام) has a whole treatise on the obligation to believe in the wilaya. We also have statements from Imam Ja'far as-Saadiq (عليه السلام) in which he was asked if rejecting the wilaya makes one a disbeliever and he replied in the affirmative. However, the difficulty arises in the actual application of this. No imam or scholar explicitly says that such person would go to the Hellfire, nor are any of the Islamic laws waived from such person, such as adaala in testimony or leading the prayer, etc. So it would seem that the precondition of the wilaayais moreso theoretical than practical. However, what that means, I don't know. And Allah knows best!

We are not having a formal discussion or debate. There are no preconditions. If you want a discussion or debate I'm happy to have one. we can do it systematically choose a topic make claim go to definitions provide evidence etc. I think it would be good between me and you as we are both active posters. But you keep saying no.

I answered one of your questions about Imam Zaid. I'm not going to answer all your questions as that's basically a disorganised debate. You keep refusing to debate me from the beginning in a systematic way with debate conditions. . But then expect me to answer your questions. So if you want a true discourse where I answer all your questions then let's have a structured debate from the beginning.

I'm trying to highlight that the broad definition given by shiaman 14 does not work in a debate between zaidi and 12er.

Looking at the debate it seems @Zaidism @Muslim2010 @Cool Are we are supposed to follow Ahlulbayt. And are also willing to define Ahlulbayt and bring forth evidence @ShiaMan14 has given a very broad linguistic definition and a sunni definition. So is not defending the Shia position of how we follow Ahlulbayt. It seems the aim is the win the debate on a linguistic technicality ? If we do use the broad definition then Sunni, 12er and Zaidi all follow Ahlulbayt. But again who really follows them as commanded by the Prophet.