Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله


Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Zaidism last won the day on March 10 2021

Zaidism had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Religion
    Shia Islam
  • Mood
    سُبْحَانَ اللهِ، وَالحَمْدُ لِلهِ، وَلَا إِلهَ إِلَّا اللهُ، وَاللهُ أَكْبَرُ
  • Favorite Subjects
    كتَابَ اللَّهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ وَ أَهْلَ البَيتِ

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

10,144 profile views

Zaidism's Achievements

  1. You have conceded to the point that the verse(s) I shared in question offers an implication towards the practice of Mut'ah, as for the analogy you gave it is a direct response to your own position for permanent marriage as well, not us. The reason is because unlike Twelvers we necessitate that for permanent marriages there needs to be the approval of a guardian, and the presence of two witnesses. Therefore, this scenario which you have drawn also serves as a refutation to your own concept of marriage. Let us take your mother, and son scenario in lieu of the conditions of the Zaidiyyah. We find that before conceiving the son the mother first had to get married, correct? Well, when she married the father of the son there were two witnesses present, and her guardian had approved. This ensures that the lineage of the son is preserved, unlike in cases of Mut'ah. and don't tell me DNA tests, not only are they recent, over 80% of the world has no access to them. Now, for whatever odd reason the son is separated from the mother from birth as you say, let us presume due to a war of some sort, or invasion. This son finds a woman who is at least twenty or so years his senior. Again, this goes to show the fragility of your jurisprudence, as even if she was married before there still needs to be the approval of her guardian, and the presence of two witnesses! So, the son brings this woman, who he does not know that she is his mother. The first thing that is done is checking the lineages of both the son, and the mother, and the inquiry posed to her guardian. By going through this checking process, a) the witnesses, b) the guardian of the mother - did she have a prior child? - and c) the lineages of both. It is impossible for this marriage to occur, however, it is possible in lieu of the Twelver school, because they'd just say the mother is a non-virgin, and if she is 'financially-capable' some nonsensical notion brought forth by modernity then there is no need for this checking process to occur. Moreover, I would like to add that once parties are brought together, the guardian will undoubtedly know that the woman was previously married, why? Well, unlike Twelvers we necessitate the presence of witnesses, and guardians, and especially under an Islamic government there will be documentation of this marriage - not some nonsense done in secrecy, or underground Mut'ah brothels - so, she will be asked the million-dollar question: Did your previous husband enter into you? If yes, did you have children? Clearly, she would know. Therefore, the marriage would halt due to (a) not knowing where this lost child is, (b) syncing both lineages, or not knowing both lineages, (c) the age difference, (d) inquiry as to where both spent their lives living, and who the previous husband was, as well as who the father, and mother of the son are. This is an impossibility to occur, however, as you have wonderfully pointed out it is a possibility to occur according to the Twelver framework. Therefore, I invite you to the path of the Prophet, and his progeny whom he has said regarding them: {I leave behind that which you hold on to, you will not go astray! The book of Allah, and my progeny} Even polytheists have good intentions, our discussion revolves around which tradition promotes: shameful, despicable, and evil practice.
  2. Wa 'Alaykum al-Salam brother The progeny of the Prophet all understood this enjoyment as enjoyment in a lawful marriage, what did you make of the explanation of al-Imam al-Hadi (upon him be peace)? Here, I will present an unequivocal example from the Glorious Qur'an itself. {Do not marry former wives of your fathers—except what was done previously. It was indeed a shameful, despicable, and evil practice} [4:22] I won't go into the many nuances of it, this will be a straightforward example Insha'Allah. When you go through your corpus you'll find that there are {Fabricated} narrations from Imam al-Sadiq (upon him be peace) where he says there is no need to look to deeply into the history of the women you seek to do Mut'ah with [refer to Majlisi Hadith compilation on Mut'ah], and even today you have jurists who deem this practice permissible with prostitutes! Au'odhubillah, May Allah safeguard us from such evils. Now, Allah (Exalted is He) is describing the marrying of former wives of your fathers as: shameful, despicable, and evil practice. Through Mut'ah one easily opens this door, because you can have relations with the same women, without anyone knowing. The reason is because you do not deem the necessity of there to be two witnesses, and the approval of the guardian unlike what the followers of the Ahl al-Bayt {the Zaidiyyah} maintain. Tell me how are you going to avoid this possibility from occurring? You believe that a man who is married can still do Mut'ah. Well, this individual will go and engage in this practice secretly, thereafter his son will find a women and he will also engage in that practice secretly. Technically, both did nothing wrong according to Twelver jurisprudence, however, according to the word of Allah what they did was: shameful, despicable, and evil practice. I believe al-Imam al-Hadi presented the case beautifully, but this is just another quick example from the Criterion.
  3. Salam 'Alaykum brother, it has been nearly ten months and you still aren't back. We pray that you, and your dear ones are well. Hope to see you soon, Insha'Allah. 

  4. Incorrect, it was the Prophet (upon him and his Ahl al-Bayt be peace) who ceased this practice. The only sect that differs out of all the Muslims (Shia/Sunni) are the Imamiyah. al-Imām al-Hādī ilal-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn (upon him be peace) said: Mutʿah for us is enjoying copulation with women through a marriage contract that has the approval of the guardian, and the presence of two just witnesses. Regarding that is what Allāh (Blessed and Exalted is He) said: {So for whatever you enjoy [of marriage] from them, give them their due compensation} [4:24]. What is meant is whatever one enjoys of them in the marriage through the approval of their guardian, and giving them their compensation which is the dowry. As for the people of heinousness who seek to find reasons to vindicate what is impermissible by maintaining that the woman can contract her own marriage solely between her, and her husband without the permission of the guardian, we do not give any regard to their saying, nor is it reliable. This is because Allāh (Glorious is He) nullified such statements, and that is through what He made clear of His decree that the marriage is consummated after the approval of the guardians, and He made clear its prohibition for women without their approval. He (Glorious is He) said: {Marry off the ˹free˺ singles among you, as well as the righteous of your bondmen and bondwomen}. And He (Glorious is He) said: {Do not prevent them from remarrying their ex-husbands}. And He (Glorious is He) said: {So marry them with the permission of their families}. In all of that, Allāh (Glorious is He) orders that the marriage contract is in the hands of the guardians, and not like the falsifiers who lie against Allāh by interpreting it to mean that the matter is in the hands of women. Allāh prohibited them from that, in the same manner he ordered it for their guardians. Allāh is Ever-Kind, Merciful, Omnipotent, and of generous benevolence. How can He permit such a matter, or decree it for them, and He says: {Allāh does not command to obscenities. Are you saying about Allāh what you know not?}. What obscenity is greater than he who permits women to marry themselves off without [the presence of] men. Women would leave the hands of their guardians, and go against what Allāh had ordered them of their Hijab. If a Fājir (open-sinner) was found with a Fājirah he, and she would both claim that they were married. This would cause what Allāh had ordered of penalty regarding them to be inapplicable [in society]. If they claimed to be married while witnesses testified against them, then the testimony of any witness would be arbitrary, and none would receive a punishment after their testimony. The Fāsiqīn (sinners) who advance towards Fusūq (wicked deeds) would certainly advance towards lying. They would say whatever would free them from the punishment, and if such was permissible for the Muslims to do then nothing would be established from the rule of the Lord of the Worlds when it comes to those who commit Zina (fornication) from the Fāsiqīn (sinners). Every Fājir (open-sinner) would dare against Allāh [Glorious is He], if such was the case - free is Allāh (Exalted is He) from permitting such - There would be no meaning for His saying (Glorious is He): {As for female and male fornicators, give each of them one hundred lashes, and do not let pity for them make you lenient in ˹enforcing˺ the law of Allāh}. Because whenever a fornicator is caught he would claim that they were married, and she would support him in his claim out of fear for both of them receiving the punishment - if what they claim is true - Nay! Allāh is greatest in estimation, and wisdom, so as to permit what the fabricators impossibly claim. [Kitāb al-Aḥkām, by al-Imām al-Hādī ilal-Ḥaqq Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn (upon them be peace)] The same manner that alcohol, and praying was permitted at one point in time, it was later abrogated. The jurist from the sons of ʿAlī Abū al-Ṭahir Aḥmad b. ʿĪsā b. ʿAbdullāh b. Muḥammad b. ʿUmar b. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib narrated to us saying: My father narrated to me, from his father, from Zayd b. ʿAlī: He was asked regarding Mutʿah, he said: It is like [consuming] dead animals, blood, and the flesh of swine. [Amālī al-Imām Aḥmad b. ʿĪsā b. Zayd b. ʿAlī] You literally have the grandson of Imam Zayd, narrating from his father ʿĪsā, from his father al-Imam Zayd! What else do you want? You people are lost in the saying of other than the Ahl al-Bayt. Go click on the PDF I shared and illuminate yourself with those who you have disregarded from the progeny of the Prophet. None of your Hadith works are even compiled by a member, or descendant of the Ahl al-Bayt. @Muslim2010 - Has presented a wonderful, and concise exposition of Twelver fiqh! This is exactly how it is done, for example when Twelvers see that there are two Sahih Sanad opinions from Imam Sadiq, they take the one that opposes the other sects. Whereas Allah Says: {Most of them follow nothing but ˹inherited˺ assumptions. ˹And˺ surely assumptions can in no way replace the truth} [10:36] I know this is the position of the Ahl al-Bayt, and I know this is the position of al-Imam al-Sadiq because we don't believe in Taqiyyah in matters of Halal, and Haram. You, however, follow a reactionary fiqh, and a dark corpus that says your Imams hid their own Imamah from their sons, kin, and the rest of the Ummah. It is appalling to say the least, and the Qur'an severely condemns it! Now, I am not here to discuss whether it is permitted or not, I am here to use the intellect, and the Qur'an - also known as the criterion - to assess whether this terrible practice is legitimate, or not. You can't play your chain games with us in the same way you do with Sunnis, because we don't believe in Adalat al-Sahaba, and we don't believe in anything that contradicts the Qur'an even if al-Imam Zayd himself said it! Therefore, {Bring your proof if ye are truthful} [2:11].
  5. @Gaius I. Caesar May Allah bless you for your kind message, and Alhamdulilah I am very firm in my Islamic belief! I couldn’t leave Islam if I wanted to, due to my deep commitment to it intellectually, and spiritually. May Allah keep us all steadfast. I was referring to the point on Twelverism, I am no longer a Twelver. May Allah keep us upon the love of our Prophet, and his vicegerent - who none can contend with - Amīr al-Mu’minīn. There is nothing but loss for the one who leaves Islam.
  6. May Allah bless you brother, and I too apologize to you in particular and to anyone on this forum in general if I have displayed any rudeness, or insincerity. May Allah guide us all.
  7. @guest 2025 I believe it is emotional rhetoric brother, the reason I say that is because you’re trying to find excuses in my character to go ahead of some of the points of contention that I have brought regarding Twelverism. If you were sincere in your advice, you could have sent me this message privately instead of putting to question a very important, and necessary trait of a Muslim which is their mannerisms. I assure you, had you sent me the same message privately, I would have taken it with open arms and would have even suggested we have a nice warm phone call. I would have shared with you some of the introspection that you rightfully suggest to do.
  8. Thank you for your question, like Sunnis, we also have a Salaf. Our Salaf are exclusively from the Ahl al-Bayt, and their consensus to us is binding in religion, as per the saying of the Messenger of Allah (upon him and his Ahl al-Bayt be peace): {I leave behind the two weighty things, the book of Allah, and my progeny. If you hold on to them, you will not go astray.} Imam al-Baqir (upon him be peace) said: (We the Ahl al-Bayt differ in matters of Furu' and Allah will not cause us to reach an errant consensus) Therefore, we stick to the Madhab of the Ahl al-Bayt, as they are the arks of salvation. When it comes to companion X, and Hadith Y we do not regard it, because the progeny of the Prophet have been clear. You are free to click on the link, and perceive the consensus listed. Twelvers don't have a Salaf, as for Sunnis I could care less with all due respect, as their tradition is filled with false attributions, such as seeing Allah in the hereafter, intercession being made for major sinners, etc. More on our epistemology here:
  9. @guest 2025 Salam brother, I appreciate the display of sincerity, as well as the indication to stop and reflect. However, I would also like to say that a claim of there being a deterioration of Akhlaq, and Adab is a claim which is unjustified without indication. When I was on this forum I did not really engage in any back and forth (polemical) discourse, as there wasn't much of that, or you were in complete agreement with whatever - little - discourse there was with any interlocutor. Now that the goalpost has shifted towards something which you deeply believe, it is understandable to perceive there being a deterioration of whatever mannerisms you had in mind. All that withstanding, I would love for you to kindly point towards any such statement(s) which are lacking in Akhlaq, and Adab. With the same fairness you have utilized to recite that supplication, I invite you to fairly examine the debate/discussion threads I have had, and equally scrutinize any of my interlocutors, and notice the disrespect, and mocking I have received and the manner in which they were responded to. Moreover, look at the discussion I had with brother layman, you will notice a difference in tone. The reason can be deduced easily after your fair assessment of the discussion threads. That being said I would like you to demonstrate this deterioration, because I can say with confidence that I have not insulted anyone, or their intelligence; nor have I directly attacked an individual. So if you are judging matters based on a simple shift in tone, I would say that your conclusion is unjustified. Therefore, kindly peruse the discussion threads I have had, and save us all the unnecessary emotional rhetoric.
  10. No, because we don't take any of our beliefs from Umar. You are free to click on the link and see the consensus of the Ahl al-Bayt on this matter. I am interested in discussing the first three points I mentioned, as they are necessary. Simply disagreeing with a point because Umar holds to it is a fallacy.
  11. al-Sayyid al-ʿAllāmah Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ḥoūthī said: As for the Shi’a, and those who are intended are the Imāmīyah. Their deviance from the Ahl al-Bayt, save the Twelve is apparent, and cannot be denied. How can it not be such, while they permit Mutʿah? The honorable men from the sons of al-Ḥasan, and al-Ḥusayn (upon them be peace) have narrated its abrogation, impermissibility, and the condition of the approval of the guardian, as well as others who we have mentioned. They have not taken their narrations as points of caution, so as to stop and be careful when it comes to their religion. For, the believers halt at points of suspicion. They do not mention anyone other than the Twelve [he intends that they do not rely on anyone from the noble men from the sons of al-Ḥasan, and al-Ḥusayn save their Twelve Imāms] in their works. They do not even look at their narrations, or history except for seldom mentioning their revolutions. As for the reliance on al-Bāqir, al-Ṣādiq, al-Riḍhā, and al-Kāẓim (upon them be peace) it is venturing to a mirage. This is because they only narrate from them through intermediaries from their Salaf (predecessors), and not a single one of them is from the sons of the Prophet (upon him and his Ahl al-Bayt be peace). In reality, their reliance is on Hishām b. al-Ḥakam, Hishām b. Sālim, al-Ṭāq, al-Ṭabrisī, al-Ṭūsī, al-Kulaynī, and al-Mufīd. They are the ark of Nuh (Noah) for them, they turn wherever they turn, and the sons of al-Ḥasan, and al-Ḥusayn are disregarded. [al-Jawāb al-Kāshif lil-Ibtīlās ‘An Masā’il al-Afrīqī Ilyās, wā al-Jawāb al-Rāqī ‘An Masā’il al-ʿIrāqī, by al-Sayyid al-’Allāmah Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ḥouthi].
  12. All that you quoted is not a Hujjah (authority) over us, only the Ahl al-Bayt (upon them be peace) are. Our epistemology differs from Ahlul-Hadith, as we do not accept beliefs that are against the Qur'an, as the Sunnis, and Twelvers do by believing that the Prophet will intercede for Major sinners (from his Ummah), etc. The point isn't to play this Hadith game where you bring traditions, and I bring traditions. The point is to return to the Qur'an, and the purpose of the Ahl al-Bayt is that they are guardians over the Qur'an. I already concede to the point that you have this in your corpus to the extent of it being mass-transmitted, and unlike Sunnis where you can quote such narrations, you cannot do so with Zaydis as our position (which is the position of the Ahl al-Bayt collectively) is that this practice is strictly prohibited. So, what we would do is concede that both of us have this as established in the corpus of one another, and thereafter seek to see which position is inline with the Qur'an, intellect, and ethics. If you are interested, we can discuss how it is not: - A) Qur'anic - B) Logical - C) Ethical
  13. Mutʿah is A) - Not Qur'anic B) - Completely illogical C) - Not a teaching of the Ahl al-Bayt (upon them be peace) It is was abrogated in the same manner alcohol was abrogated, and it is as foolvish as drinking alcohol. Muḥammad b. Mansūr al-Murādī narrates with his chain, from ʿAbdul-Raḥmān b. al-Aṣbahānī, he said: I asked Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad regarding Mutʿah, he said: Describe it to me. I said: A man finds a woman, and says: I will marry you with this Dirham for enjoyment. He said: That is Zina (fornication). Source: [Amālī al-Imām Aḥmad b. ʿĪsā b. Zayd b. ʿAlī, the section on what is mentionedregarding the impermissibility of Mutʿah, and any marriage that is devoid of two witnesses]. You are free brother to take the words of Zurarah, Abu Baseer, Shaytan al-Taq, and others who attributed lies to the Ahl al-Bayt, I am very comfortable in following the consensus of the ʿItra which is consistent with the Qur'an, and ʿAql. Moreover, I will take my fiqh from the works of the grandson of al-Imām Zayd ahead of al-Kulayni, and most certainly ahead of al-Majlisi (whom both believed the Qur'an was corrupted/incomplete).
  • Create New...