Ansar Shiat Ali

@Debate follower Salam. I actually really love that you ignored the point that I made. Clearly Nahj al-Balagha was not written for authenticity and what I quoted from Qabasat Ilm al-Rijal proves this. What I wanted to show is that just because it's in Nahj al-Balagha doesn't mean it's hujjah, bring the original source when you want to quote it. Since you do seem very confident and happy that you quoted a Khutbah fabricated by a Zindeeq/Heretic (Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi), so give yourself a pat on the back. الحمد لله رب العالمين وصل الله على محمد وآل محمد Wa Salamu Alykum wa Rahmat Allah

What I posted about Qabasat above if anyone wants it

What is very funny is that sadly you guys don't actually read your books. I love how you guys go around and hold this Khutbah to the full standard as if it destroys Shiism. Before we get into why this Khutbah is most likely a fabrication and Imam Ali (عليه السلام) probably never said it, let me teach you about Nahj al Balagha. In Qabasat min Ilm al-Rijal, By Sayyid Muhammad Ridha al-Sistani (حفظه الله), Vol.2, Page 142-143, "Nahj al-Balagha.... And Al-Muhaqiq al-Tustari (اعلى الله مقامه) mentioned that al-Sayyid [Al-Sharif] Al-Radhi (رضي الله عنه) that a great amount of his book (Nahj al-Balagha) is taken from the books of the Jumhur. That is why sometimes that he narrates in his book what goes against the books of our companions (the Shia). Then he (Tustari) mentioned a few examples." So, let's see where Al-Sharif al-Radhi got it from OH MY GOD!!! WHAT IS THIS?????? IT'S FROM TARIKH AL-TABARI? WITH SAYF IBN UMAR AL-TAMIMI IN THE CHAIN? Yes that is indeed right. Who's Sayf Ibn Umar btw? الأسم : سيف بن عمر الشهرة : سيف بن عمر الضبي النسب : السعدي, البرجمي, الضبي, التميمي, الأسيدي, الكوفي الرتبة : متهم بالوضع عاش في : البصرة, الكوفة أبو أحمد بن عدي الجرجاني : ضعيف، وبعض أحاديثه مشهورة وعامتها منكرة لم يتابع عليها وهو إلى الضعف أقرب منه إلى الصدق أبو جعفر العقيلي : لا يتابع على كثير من حديثه أبو حاتم الرازي : متروك الحديث يشبه حديثه حديث الواقدي أبو حاتم بن حبان البستي : يروي الموضوعات عن الأثبات، اتهم بالزندقة، قالوا إنه كان يضع الحديث أبو دواد السجستاني : ليس بشيء أبو عبد الله الحاكم النيسابوري : اتهم بالزندقة وساقط الروايه أبو نعيم الأصبهاني : متهم في دينه مرمي بالزندقة ساقط الحديث لا شيء أحمد بن شعيب النسائي : ضعيف ابن حجر العسقلاني : ضعيف الحديث، صاحب كتاب الردة عمدة في التاريخ، أفحش ابن حبان القول فيه ابن عراق : متهم بالزندقة ووضع الحديث الدارقطني : ضعيف، متروك، ذكره في الضعفاء والمتروكين مجلي بن جميع : كان يضع الحديث وكان قد اتهم بالزندقة مصنفوا تحرير تقريب التهذيب : متروك، فحديثه ضعيف جدا يحيى بن معين : ضعيف الحديث، ومن رواية أبي جعفر الحضرمي سئل عنه فقال: فليس خيرا منه يعقوب بن سفيان الفسوي : ليس بشيء http://hadith.islam-db.com/narrators/3737/سيف-بن-عمر Mashallah. He is matruk, a fabricator, dhaeef/weak. And get this, He was said to a Zindeeq/Heretic?!?!? So my advice is: 1. Read your books 2. Go read about why Nahj al-Balagha was written 3. And finally, go read Nahj al-Balagha from beginning to end.

Wa alykum al salam. Labayk Ya Husayn! You don't have to curse and send salam 100 times, but there is a bigger reward if you do. Also brother @Ashvazdanghe posted a version of Ziyarat Ashura that is not very famous, you get the complete reward without cursing and sending salam 100 times.

I responded to a few of the brothers answers here btw, JazakumAllah Khayr al Jaza!

wa alykum al salam wa rahmat allah. Thank you for the source

1. I don't understand the concept of "If a son of Fatima (عليها السلام) rises up he is an Imam." 2. Where is the proof Zayd (عليه السلام) believed in this concept? It seems like you made him an Imam without him knowing about this "Imamah of the Zaydiyyah" in the 1st place. 3. A revolt needs a leader, and this leader must be from Ahlulbayt. But Rasul Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) left behind his Ahlulbayt who were under the kisa, if they rise up then we follow them. 4. (Concerning one of the Imams of the Zaydiyya) I suppose you made al-Hasan al-Muthana an Imam because he joined a revolt against the Ummayd "caliphate", but what's funny is that Al Muthana wasn't even the leader of the revolt! And he gave Bay'ah to the nephew of the killer of his father! http://alhassanain.org/m/arabic/?com=book&id=1347&page=380 Al-Masabeeh by Ahmed Ibn Ibrahim al Hasani I still need proof that revolting makes you an Imam. Praising Zayd (عليه السلام) came down to his intentions, and he did rise up for the Ridha of Ale Muhammad (صلوات الله عليه وعليهم) according to the Twelvers. But agreeing and giving permission to rise up doesn't make you believe in another persons Imamate. Al-Kulayni (رضي الله عنه) narrated with a sahih chain, قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ (عليه السلام) وَ لَا تَقُولُوا خَرَجَ زَيْدٌ فَإِنَّ زَيْداً كَانَ عَالِماً وَ كَانَ صَدُوقاً وَ لَمْ يَدْعُكُمْ إِلَى نَفْسِهِ إِنَّمَا دَعَاكُمْ إِلَى الرِّضَا مِنْ آلِ مُحَمَّدٍ (عليهم السلام) https://thaqalayn.net/chapter/8/1/381 And why was the standard for accepting Imamate twisted? For Ali (عليه السلام), Rasul Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) showed clearly that Ali (عليه السلام) is the Imam after him. Ali did the same for al-Hasan al-Mujtaba (عليهم السلام), and Al-Hasan did the same for al-Husayn (عليهم السلام). But after the death of Sayyid al-Shuhada' (عليه السلام), It suddenly became "Who is the son of Fatima who will lead a revolution?" (which is something al-Hasan al-Muthana didn't do) These prove nothing. The Shia ummah needed guidance and their questions to be answered. They also need the Imam of their time to guide them. The difference between the revolt of Zayd (عليه السلام) and Al-Husayn (عليه السلام) is that Husayn's opened peoples eyes to the kufr and nifaq of Banu Ummayah. This is guidence. People like al Nafs al-Zakiyyah (رضي الله عنه) and Al-Husayn Ibn Ali Sahib Fakh (عليه السلام) just got murdered wuthout showing any type of guidence to the people. So when al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) says that Zayd (عليه السلام) deserves bay'ah more then him, this is not Imamate. Zayd (عليه السلام) was willing to revolt because he didn't have the burden of guiding the people like Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) did. Inshallah this Q and A, and discussion is fruitful. Inshallah we all learn something

Al-Salamu alykum. I am not here to debate, but ask questions. Did Zayd Ibn Ali (عليه السلام) claim Imamah? If so, bring proof. Did anyone of Zayd's time acknowledge his Imamah? If so bring, Who? Also bring proof for this. Did any of the 9 Imams after al-Husayn (عليهم السلام) acknowledge the Imamah of Zayd (عليه السلام)? If so, bring proof.

الله ارحم الراحمين وخير الغافرين

اللهم صل على المصطفى الامجد والرسول المسدد ابو القاسم محمد وعلى آل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين

@Zaidism There is the I'smah of our Imams. Our guidance is listening to the Imam and obeying him, something that the followers of Zayd (عليه السلام) didn't do sadly. Here is the guidance the Imam has given us

Can we agree 1st that the verse of tathir means infallibility/I'smah? We agree with Ahlul Kisa and their infallibility, the problem is with the Imams after them. Here is the best Sunni Tafsir, From Abi Al Daylam that he said, Ali Ibn Al Husayn (عليهم السلام) said to a man from Sham, "Have you read in Surat al Ahzab (33:33)?" The man said, "You are them?" So he (al-Sajjad) said, "Yes" Imam Ali Ibn Al Husayn (عليه السلام) wasn't in the kisa but here he is saying it was revealed for him as well, I wonder why. Alhamdulillah this is in our books as well

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَعِينُوا بِالصَّبْرِ وَالصَّلَاةِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ الصَّابِرِينَ O you who have believed, seek help through patience and prayer. Indeed, Allah is with the patient.

That's what the 12ers do. We don't believe the 3rd testimony is part of the Adhan. Its a شعار for the Shia. Its like saying the salawat between every line. We don't think its part of the Adhan.

As for Shia books, https://thaqalayn.net/