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
Sign in to follow this  
Atif_khan

The Turbulent History Of Shia Imams

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(salam) , I read a thought provoking article about the shia Imamat which is the core concept of the the shia religion and all the usool wo faru are dependent on this concept. ( would prove it with references if someone desires). However , attributing Godly qualities to humans , exaggeration in their statues and assuming that they are infallibles creates serious contradictions when these concepts are compared with the ground realities. The sunni concept of khilafat can be turbulent for obvious reasons as they dont consider the sahabas Rz to be infallible and no supernatural myths are associated with them however when the concept of Imamat (compared with sunni concept of Khilafat) assuming that the Imams were infallible and divinely appointed, should have been smooth ,but this did not happen and the History of Imamat is more chaotic than the khilafat which raises serious questions on the concepts of Imamat, divine appointment and above all Infallibility.The sunni did not split into any sects during the political chaos of khilafat however, Shias split into so many sects during the Imamat.

* The First Ten Imams

The cornerstone of the Shia faith is the belief that the spiritual and temporal leadership of this Ummah after the demise of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is vested in the Imam, who is appointed, like the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself, by Allah, and who enjoys all the distinctions and privileges of a Prophet. (In fact, the Shia regard their Imams as superior to all of the Prophets aside from Prophet Muhammad [صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم])

However, the Shia believe that Imamah, unlike Prophethood, can never come to an end. In this regard there is a well-known Shia hadith which says that “the world cannot exist without an Imam,” and another which says: ”if the earth were to be without an Imam for a single day, it would sink.”

Thus, when it came to pass that the first of those whom they regard as their Imams (Ali [رضّى الله عنه]) left this world, a problem arose. Some of those who regarded themselves as his followers claimed that he did not in fact die, but that he was in occultation and would return to establish justice. Others said that he was succeeded as Imam by his son Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), who was in turn succeeded by his brother Hussain (رضّى الله عنه).

When Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) died, there were some who claimed to follow his other brother Muhammad (known as Ibn al-Hanafiyyah) as their Imam. When he died, his followers claimed that he was in reality alive, in occultation, and that he will return in due time. Others amongst the Shia took Hussain’s son, Ali, surnamed Zayn al-Abidin, as their Imam, and upon his death transferred their loyalties to his son, Muhammad al-Baqir.

When al-Baqir died, there were once again elements from amongst the Shia who denied his death and claimed that he would return one day, while others took his son Jafar as-Sadiq as their Imam.

When he died, there was mass confusion amongst the Shia: each of his sons (Ismail, Abdullah, Muhammad, Zakariyya, Ishaq and Musa) were claimed by various groups amongst the Shia to be their Imam. In addition to them, there was a group who believed that Jafar did not really die, and that he would return one day.

More or less the same thing happened at the death of his son Musa. Some of the Shia denied his death, believing that he will return, and others decided to take as their new Imam one of his sons. Some of these chose his son Ahmad, while others chose his other son Ali ar-Rida.

After him, they took as their Imam his son Muhammad al-Jawwad (or at-Taqi), and after him his son Ali al-Hadi (or an-Naqi). At the death of Ali al-Hadi, they looked upon his son Hasan al-Askari as their new–and 11th–Imam.

* Death of the Eleventh Imam

Six years later, in 260 AH, Hasan al-Askari, at the very young age of 28, is lying on his deathbed, but unlike any of his forefathers, he leaves no offspring, no one to whom the Shia might appropriate as their new Imam.

The Shia who had been regarding Hasan al-Askari as their Imam were thrown into mass disarray. Would this mean the end of the Imamah? The end of the Imamah would mean the end of Shi’ism and the Shia were surely not ready for this.

The confusion that reigned amongst the Shia after the death of Hasan al-Askari is reflected by the Shia writer Hasan ibn Musa an-Nawbakhti (who was alive at the time), who counts the emergence of altogether fourteen sects amongst the followers of Hasan al-Askari, each one with a different view on the future of the Imamah and the identity of the next Imam. Another Shia writer, Saad ibn Abdullah al-Qummi, who also lived during the same time, counts fifteen sects, and a century later the historian al-Masudi enumerates altogether twenty separate sects.

There were four major trends amongst these various sects:

(1) There were those who accepted the death of Hasan al-Askari as a fact, and accepted also the fact that he left no offspring. To them, Imamah had thus come to an end, just like Prophethood came to an end with the death of Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). However, there were some amongst them who kept hoping for the advent of a new Imam.

(2) The second trend was to deny the death of Hasan al-Askari, and to claim that he would return in the future to establish justice upon earth. This idea of occultation of the Imam is used by the Shia of various sects whenever it is convenient.

(3) The third trend was to extend the chain of Imamah to Hasan’s brother Jafar.

(4) The fourth trend was the claim that Hasan al-Askari did in fact have a son, but that the son went into occultation. The Ithna Ashari Shia (i.e. Twelvers) are from this group.

* Multitude of Shia Sects

Throughout the history of the Shia, there have been dozens upon dozens of sects, each claiming another lineage for the Imamah. And at each turn, either the Imamah goes to a son, a brother, or if not any of these, then the Imam must have gone into occultation; at each step, there are more schisms and consquently more Shia sects. Because of this, there have been somewhere near one hundred or even more sects of Shi’ism. Today, there are dozens of existing Shia sects (Druze, Bohras, Nizaris, Zaydis, Jarudis, Sulaymanis, Butris, Ismailis, Kaysaniyyas, Qaddahiyyas, Ghullat, Aga Khanis, Usoolis, Imamis, Shaikis, Akhbaris, etc) but it should be remembered that for each sect in existence today, there are dozens more which died out. There are fiver, sixer, sevener, niner, elevener, twelver, fourteen-er Shia.

In Shia belief, it is Kufr (disbelief) to falsely ascribe Imamah to an individual who is not really the Imam. As such, each Shia sect looks down upon the other Shia sects as Kufaar (disbelievers) since they follow a different chain of Imamah. An unbiased outsider would no doubt find this amusing, but the Ithna Ashari Shia is adamant when he looks down on Ismailis, Aga Khanis, Bohras, Druze, and other Shia sects, unable to see the same inaneness about himself. In their own circles, the Ithna Ashari Shia scoff at Ismailis and look at them as a silly minority of heretics. Little do these same Ithna Ashari Shia realize that the vast majority of the Ummah (namely the Ahlus Sunnah) looks down upon the Ithna Ashari Shia in the same way. Shi’ism is simply a collection of heretics of every different color.

Even the way a Shia has to identify himself is reflective of the number of sects at every turn: the Shia must describe himself as not just an Ithna Ashari but rather as Ithna Ashari Imami Usooli Jaffari Shia.

Twelver Ithna Ashari Shi’ism was never the predominant sect of Shi’ism like it is today; it was as marginal as the rest of the Shia sects. The only reason that the Twelver Ithna Ashari Shia have become so predominant is simply because of the actions of one man: Shah Ismail I, ruler of the Safavid Empire. He converted to Ithna Ashari Shi’ism because he wanted to oppose the dominant Ottoman Empire which was Sunni. So Ismail I made Ithna Ashari Shi’ism the official state religion and forced the entire Persian population to convert to Shi’ism or accept the penalty of death. This was the Shia Inquisition against the Sunnis of Persia, who made up the majority of the population in Persia up until this point.

If it had not been for Shah Ismail I, the Ithna Ashari sect would have died out just like the other dozens of Shia sects died out; or at most, it would have been a marginal sect like all the other obscure Shia sects (including Ismailis, Druze, Bohras, etc). Had Shah Ismail I converted to the Druze Shia sect, then the majority of Shia today would be Druze. It was simply chance that the Ithna Ashari sect became the dominant Shia sect; had Shah Ismail I not been born, then the chances are that the majority of Shia alive today would not be Ithna Ashari.

Despite the multitude of Shia sects, they are the same: they are all false religions which use their fabricated Hadith to justify their own Imams. These Shia criticize the Sunnis for not following the Imams, but they themselves can’t agree on who the Imam is! How fickle are the Shia that they can attribute divine appointment at whim!

The truth is that there is no such thing as Imamah, and the Doors of Prophethood have forever been closed with the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). There is nobody after him, and anyone who claims this is a Dajjal. The last Prophet was Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and his name was mentioned in the Quran. Where are these other so-called Infallible Imams in the Quran? Why did Allah not include them? Certainly that would have cleared up the mass confusion amongst the various Shia sects. Will the Shia then not understand the folly in their ways and how far they have strayed away from the Quran?

Edited by Atif_khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a salafi would never desire this yanqui icon - you are CIA fascist.

Atif_khan Icon

* PM this member

* Group: Advanced Members

* Posts: 52

* Joined: 29-April 10

* Location:walking on the road not taken

* Religion:salafi

* Interests:debunking the myths.Medicine and evolutionary Biology

come on , lets be rational. CIA got much important things to do than creating a trouble between the already at war shia and sunni. Im sure u can come up with some better stuff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah

I would like to answer all of your points but unfortunately I don't have enough time.

One argument that can be made to refute a large portion of your statement is in the example of the other Abrahamic religions. Is Abraham's (a) religion somehow faulty because prophets after him had followers who split into many sects and denied Islam as the correct faith? Like take Jesus (a) as an example, compare his situation to the Imams (a). Just because Christians don't believe in Jesus' prophethood doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't a prophet or that the idea of prophethood is somehow wrong or flawed. In the same way, the Imams had followers who followed the truth of their message, and some people who followed their own interests.

May Allah guide you to the Truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah

I would like to answer all of your points but unfortunately I don't have enough time.

One argument that can be made to refute a large portion of your statement is in the example of the other Abrahamic religions. Is Abraham's (a) religion somehow faulty because prophets after him had followers who split into many sects and denied Islam as the correct faith? Like take Jesus (a) as an example, compare his situation to the Imams (a). Just because Christians don't believe in Jesus' prophethood doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't a prophet or that the idea of prophethood is somehow wrong or flawed. In the same way, the Imams had followers who followed the truth of their message, and some people who followed their own interests.

May Allah guide you to the Truth.

I thik u got it wrong. whenever i have argued with my shia friends abt the Imamat, they have been telling me that Imamat was the cry of the day. There had to be a divinely appointed Imam who can keep the nation guided so that people dont go astray.Thats how u build up ur logic against the sunni school cz according to u they believe in fallible people, Fallible caliphs, narrators of hadiths and fallible mufasirs.However, for u when Imamat is a divine institue lead by an infallible, these troubles and sects which were formed during the days of imamat should be justified with some historical record or logic otherwise , its the same as the sunni caliphat or in a way worse than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thik u got it wrong. whenever i have argued with my shia friends abt the Imamat, they have been telling me that Imamat was the cry of the day.

What does this mean, cry of the day?

There had to be a divinely appointed Imam who can keep the nation guided so that people dont go astray.

Just like prophets did, would you deny that?

Thats how u build up ur logic against the sunni school cz according to u they believe in fallible people, Fallible caliphs, narrators of hadiths and fallible mufasirs.

Yes, that's how I became Shia, because its internal logic is strong.

However, for u when Imamat is a divine institue lead by an infallible, these troubles and sects which were formed during the days of imamat should be justified with some historical record or logic otherwise , its the same as the sunni caliphat or in a way worse than that.

I agree, the false Shia sects don't have a historical basis, which can be proven by strong hadiths from the Prophet (s) and other Imams (a) who the righteous Imams were. The same way there's no logic to Abu Bakr's Khilafat, except that he was chosen by his friends to steal the leadership from Ali (a). It's obvious just by looking at the statements of each Imam that they were all infallible and self-taught. Look at the respect Sunni scholars paid to Imam As-Sadiq (a), they all knew he was something special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think u did not read my initial post very well.The issues of Infallibility,divine appointment and turbulence are yet to be explained

I think u did not read my initial post very well.The issues of Infallibility,divine appointment and turbulence are yet to be explained

cry of the day = need of the day

anyone who can refute the article?

nice story atif khan :dry: any reference or history account specially for the part of Ismail 1..?

Yeah, let someone raise questions of authenticity and i will provide the references :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think u did not read my initial post very well.The issues of Infallibility,divine appointment and turbulence are yet to be explained

You haven't answered my questions about how Prophets had the same problems as Imams, yet you don't deny their prophethood. If the Prophets were infallible then why did people turn astray, just like they did with the Imams? If you answer my questions your questions will be answered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATIF_KHAH

I will assume you understand what constitutes evidence and the related academic debates surrounding evidence and the forms of evidences. I would like to say that our ulamas have presented proofs and supporting evidences for 12, Imams also if the fundamentals of a belief are not understood then the branches with emanate from that belief will not be comprehended.

Anyway, here is a masterpiece and academic response to your ill-conceived post

http://www.althaqalayn.net/Islam/Islamic%20Articles-info/GHADIR1.htm

enjoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ATIF_KHAH

I will assume you understand what constitutes evidence and the related academic debates surrounding evidence and the forms of evidences. I would like to say that our ulamas have presented proofs and supporting evidences for 12, Imams also if the fundamentals of a belief are not understood then the branches with emanate from that belief will not be comprehended.

Anyway, here is a masterpiece and academic response to your ill-conceived post

http://www.althaqalayn.net/Islam/Islamic%20Articles-info/GHADIR1.htm

enjoy

I hope some learned member will respond to this,This article cant be refuted with mere "wahabi" stuff so lets keep it relevant. Secondly, exaggeration in shia religion is the main cause of going astray.To cover up the history, mythical stories and irreasonable "love" has been invented.I think such topics should be discussed so that the Imamat and infallibility myth comes under some sunlight.More troubles were found during the divinely appointed infallible Imamat than the "usurper" caliphs

You haven't answered my questions about how Prophets had the same problems as Imams, yet you don't deny their prophethood. If the Prophets were infallible then why did people turn astray, just like they did with the Imams? If you answer my questions your questions will be answered.

According to shia theology, prophethood and Imamat are two different things.Imamat is the continuation of the prophethood just to save and carry on that mission (Mushtaq karim haqaiq page 201) . They both cant be compared and if u do so then the finality of the prophethood comes under question. The deen got completed in the time of the prophet as testified by the Quran. ( no matter how u interpret that ayath Al yoma lakum akmaltakum deenakum) so assuming that after that there was any need of Imamat to keep the umma united and keep the people on the right path then Imamat failed in achieving those goals rather it led to more split and troubles

^^^ i think according to the Salafi/wahabi school Prophet's are not infallible as well

Why not to ask a salafi abt it instead of believing in false accusations? Prophets are infallible and whoever thinks that they are fllible is not from Ahl e sunna wal jamaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope some learned member will respond to this,This article cant be refuted with mere "wahabi" stuff so lets keep it relevant. Secondly, exaggeration in shia religion is the main cause of going astray.To cover up the history, mythical stories and irreasonable "love" has been invented.I think such topics should be discussed so that the Imamat and infallibility myth comes under some sunlight.More troubles were found during the divinely appointed infallible Imamat than the "usurper" caliphs

According to shia theology, prophethood and Imamat are two different things.Imamat is the continuation of the prophethood just to save and carry on that mission (Mushtaq karim haqaiq page 201) . They both cant be compared and if u do so then the finality of the prophethood comes under question. The deen got completed in the time of the prophet as testified by the Quran. ( no matter how u interpret that ayath Al yoma lakum akmaltakum deenakum) so assuming that after that there was any need of Imamat to keep the umma united and keep the people on the right path then Imamat failed in achieving those goals rather it led to more split and troubles

Why not to ask a salafi abt it instead of believing in false accusations? Prophets are infallible and whoever thinks that they are fllible is not from Ahl e sunna wal jamaa

Relevant indeed it is to refuse evidence a rebuttal is presented. Your subjective conclusion requires an analytical response to what I have deliberated; I also can conclude you have not understood the article that I have presented, however I make it easy for you present this article your most learned people and let them respond to it on shiachat. I will be waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Relevant indeed it is to refuse evidence a rebuttal is presented. Your subjective conclusion requires an analytical response to what I have deliberated; I also can conclude you have not understood the article that I have presented, however I make it easy for you present this article your most learned people and let them respond to it on shiachat. I will be waiting

It was never intended to underestimate ur literary skills but the fact is that the circumstantial evidence in that article is so strong and evident that it can either be refuted by proving it wrong with historical references or explain the turbulence during Imamat in the view of shia sects.Like the the reasons of the "deviations" of the fivers have to be explained and so on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Ask a question (a question) and insha'Allah we will respond to it. That article is all over the place. Ask a question you have relating to it and then we will reply. Specific questions; not super vague and broad ones because then you'll get a likewise answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Ask a question (a question) and insha'Allah we will respond to it. That article is all over the place. Ask a question you have relating to it and then we will reply. Specific questions; not super vague and broad ones because then you'll get a likewise answer.

My Questions are clear and obvious. Lets start with the first one. How do u explain the Infallibility and divine appointment in such a turbulent history of Imamat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Questions are clear and obvious. Lets start with the first one. How do u explain the Infallibility and divine appointment in such a turbulent history of Imamat?

Your questions are not obvious and clear. Otherwise I wouldn't be asking. You just posted another person's "article" and asking "refute plz."

You need to explain the bolded part and, as I stated, specific questions. Not large over-arching vague/broad ones or you will be a similarly vague/broad answer.

(salam)

Edited by Dar'ul_Islam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pick up the book Shi`ite Islam by Sayyed Tabataba'i. It will give you a good foundation of what Shi`ites really believe in and what their arguments are. It'll also you teach you respect for the other traditions within Islam, not just Imami Shi`ism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pick up the book Shi`ite Islam by Sayyed Tabataba'i. It will give you a good foundation of what Shi`ites really believe in and what their arguments are. It'll also you teach you respect for the other traditions within Islam, not just Imami Shi`ism.

Bro i will get that book. Can u tell me Why do we see so much troubles in the Imamat? There is a series of disagreement which leads to the conclusion that the political crisis which started after the martyrdom of Uthman rz ( or for shia may be since the death of Prophet PBUH) effected the Institution of Imamat as well.I want to know that the Ahl e sunnah parted their ways from the shias openly after jang e safain so what stopped the shias to agree on Imams? whats ur viewpoint of those sects within shiaism which dont agree with the Ithna Ashari on the Imamat? Cant the denial of a single Imam lead to kufar according to shia discousre? If so then whats the fate of the fivers etc? If such an abundance of political crisis is found in the history of Imamat then where does the divine appointment and infallibility stand?

It will be good if u explain the reservations of many shia sects about the twelvers belief of Imam e ghaib as well.cz now its evident that there existed groups within the shiaism who did not believe in the popular belief of occultation of the 12th Imam.

Finally dont u think that all these issues raise some serious questions on the imamat?

Edited by Atif_khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth is that there is no such thing as Imamah, and the Doors of Prophethood have forever been closed with the Prophet Muhammad (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã). There is nobody after him, and anyone who claims this is a Dajjal. The last Prophet was Muhammad (Õáøì Çááå Úáíå æÂáå æÓáøã) and his name was mentioned in the Quran. Where are these other so-called Infallible Imams in the Quran? Why did Allah not include them? Certainly that would have cleared up the mass confusion amongst the various Shia sects. Will the Shia then not understand the folly in their ways and how far they have strayed away from the Quran?

I think the problem was nobody knew what the door of prophet-hood was made of. Some believed it was a wooden door while the Shiite Muslims thought it was a sliding door right from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

attributing Godly qualities to humans.

(salam)

Wait is this coming from a salafi who attributes human qualities such as (eyes, ears, hands and face) and sits on a chair to Allah (SWT).

Wa'Salam!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Wait is this coming from a salafi who attributes human qualities such as (eyes, ears, hands and face) and sits on a chair to Allah (SWT).

Wa'Salam!

I hope u get over the "salafi" obsession and answer the questions raised. As far as the bodily existence of God is concerned, make a new thread for that and i will explain the salafi belief regarding that to u. Its better not to believe in hatred-oriented stories against the salafis.

Im yet waiting for a solid refutation to the initial post of mine.

I think the problem was nobody knew what the door of prophet-hood was made of. Some believed it was a wooden door while the Shiite Muslims thought it was a sliding door right from the start.

can u elaborate wat u trying to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, what the heck happened to all the intellectual Sunnis?

I hope u get over the "salafi" obsession and answer the questions raised. As far as the bodily existence of God is concerned, make a new thread for that and i will explain the salafi belief regarding that to u. Its better not to believe in hatred-oriented stories against the salafis.

Im yet waiting for a solid refutation to the initial post of mine.

can u elaborate wat u trying to say?

Your post is too long for me to even consider reading it.

Edited by al-Irshad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, what the heck happened to all the intellectual Sunnis?

Your post is too long for me to even consider reading it.

Right now im thinking abt the intellectual shias. I still have a high hope that someone will respond to the main article.

I had a simple Question for u which u are trying to dodge with. What do u think about the fivers? Are the muslims (momin? They reject 7 of ur "divinely" appointed Imams.

Edited by Atif_khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now im thinking abt the intellectual shias. I still have a high hope that someone will respond to the main article

I hope you understand that the narration of the twelve successors and the narration of leadership (imamate) continuing till the Day of Judgment are present in Sahih Bukhari.

Intellectual Shi`ites need intellectuals to respond to. Were you even the least bit of an intellectual, you would've expressed yourself succinctly and concisely in your first post, instead of giving us bricks to work with. If you can post a two or three short paragraph summary, I'll respond to it. Otherwise, it'd be a waste of my time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not an intellectual, but you are denying Imamah which itself is mentioned in Quran and Hadith.

maybe this thread will help you to start with

What True Religons Have Common In Between

Why don't u give a read to my initial article? it wont take longer than two mins probably.Its not about the denial of Imamat, its about debunking the myth of "divine appontments" and infallibity.The point which i want to make is that the era of Imamat was full of crisis and confusions are shia did not have a uniform thought about the Imams.

I hope you understand that the narration of the twelve successors and the narration of leadership (imamate) continuing till the Day of Judgment are present in Sahih Bukhari.

Intellectual Shi`ites need intellectuals to respond to. Were you even the least bit of an intellectual, you would've expressed yourself succinctly and concisely in your first post, instead of giving us bricks to work with. If you can post a two or three short paragraph summary, I'll respond to it. Otherwise, it'd be a waste of my time.

The specific hadith u mentioned in sahi Bukhari has a different interpretation but right now lets not jump to that issue.Im repeating my one-liner for u as u hate to read long posts. "Are the fivers still muslims according to the ithna Ashari after rejecting the 7 Imams?"

I think the orignal post is yet to be answered so let me refresh the memories again. **sighs** :angel:

(salam) , I read a thought provoking article about the shia Imamat which is the core concept of the the shia religion and all the usool wo faru are dependent on this concept. ( would prove it with references if someone desires). However , attributing Godly qualities to humans , exaggeration in their statues and assuming that they are infallibles creates serious contradictions when these concepts are compared with the ground realities. The sunni concept of khilafat can be turbulent for obvious reasons as they dont consider the sahabas Rz to be infallible and no supernatural myths are associated with them however when the concept of Imamat (compared with sunni concept of Khilafat) assuming that the Imams were infallible and divinely appointed, should have been smooth ,but this did not happen and the History of Imamat is more chaotic than the khilafat which raises serious questions on the concepts of Imamat, divine appointment and above all Infallibility.The sunni did not split into any sects during the political chaos of khilafat however, Shias split into so many sects during the Imamat.

* The First Ten Imams

The cornerstone of the Shia faith is the belief that the spiritual and temporal leadership of this Ummah after the demise of the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) is vested in the Imam, who is appointed, like the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) himself, by Allah, and who enjoys all the distinctions and privileges of a Prophet. (In fact, the Shia regard their Imams as superior to all of the Prophets aside from Prophet Muhammad [صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم])

However, the Shia believe that Imamah, unlike Prophethood, can never come to an end. In this regard there is a well-known Shia hadith which says that “the world cannot exist without an Imam,” and another which says: ”if the earth were to be without an Imam for a single day, it would sink.”

Thus, when it came to pass that the first of those whom they regard as their Imams (Ali [رضّى الله عنه]) left this world, a problem arose. Some of those who regarded themselves as his followers claimed that he did not in fact die, but that he was in occultation and would return to establish justice. Others said that he was succeeded as Imam by his son Hasan (رضّى الله عنه), who was in turn succeeded by his brother Hussain (رضّى الله عنه).

When Hussain (رضّى الله عنه) died, there were some who claimed to follow his other brother Muhammad (known as Ibn al-Hanafiyyah) as their Imam. When he died, his followers claimed that he was in reality alive, in occultation, and that he will return in due time. Others amongst the Shia took Hussain’s son, Ali, surnamed Zayn al-Abidin, as their Imam, and upon his death transferred their loyalties to his son, Muhammad al-Baqir.

When al-Baqir died, there were once again elements from amongst the Shia who denied his death and claimed that he would return one day, while others took his son Jafar as-Sadiq as their Imam.

When he died, there was mass confusion amongst the Shia: each of his sons (Ismail, Abdullah, Muhammad, Zakariyya, Ishaq and Musa) were claimed by various groups amongst the Shia to be their Imam. In addition to them, there was a group who believed that Jafar did not really die, and that he would return one day.

More or less the same thing happened at the death of his son Musa. Some of the Shia denied his death, believing that he will return, and others decided to take as their new Imam one of his sons. Some of these chose his son Ahmad, while others chose his other son Ali ar-Rida.

After him, they took as their Imam his son Muhammad al-Jawwad (or at-Taqi), and after him his son Ali al-Hadi (or an-Naqi). At the death of Ali al-Hadi, they looked upon his son Hasan al-Askari as their new–and 11th–Imam.

* Death of the Eleventh Imam

Six years later, in 260 AH, Hasan al-Askari, at the very young age of 28, is lying on his deathbed, but unlike any of his forefathers, he leaves no offspring, no one to whom the Shia might appropriate as their new Imam.

The Shia who had been regarding Hasan al-Askari as their Imam were thrown into mass disarray. Would this mean the end of the Imamah? The end of the Imamah would mean the end of Shi’ism and the Shia were surely not ready for this.

The confusion that reigned amongst the Shia after the death of Hasan al-Askari is reflected by the Shia writer Hasan ibn Musa an-Nawbakhti (who was alive at the time), who counts the emergence of altogether fourteen sects amongst the followers of Hasan al-Askari, each one with a different view on the future of the Imamah and the identity of the next Imam. Another Shia writer, Saad ibn Abdullah al-Qummi, who also lived during the same time, counts fifteen sects, and a century later the historian al-Masudi enumerates altogether twenty separate sects.

There were four major trends amongst these various sects:

(1) There were those who accepted the death of Hasan al-Askari as a fact, and accepted also the fact that he left no offspring. To them, Imamah had thus come to an end, just like Prophethood came to an end with the death of Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). However, there were some amongst them who kept hoping for the advent of a new Imam.

(2) The second trend was to deny the death of Hasan al-Askari, and to claim that he would return in the future to establish justice upon earth. This idea of occultation of the Imam is used by the Shia of various sects whenever it is convenient.

(3) The third trend was to extend the chain of Imamah to Hasan’s brother Jafar.

(4) The fourth trend was the claim that Hasan al-Askari did in fact have a son, but that the son went into occultation. The Ithna Ashari Shia (i.e. Twelvers) are from this group.

* Multitude of Shia Sects

Throughout the history of the Shia, there have been dozens upon dozens of sects, each claiming another lineage for the Imamah. And at each turn, either the Imamah goes to a son, a brother, or if not any of these, then the Imam must have gone into occultation; at each step, there are more schisms and consquently more Shia sects. Because of this, there have been somewhere near one hundred or even more sects of Shi’ism. Today, there are dozens of existing Shia sects (Druze, Bohras, Nizaris, Zaydis, Jarudis, Sulaymanis, Butris, Ismailis, Kaysaniyyas, Qaddahiyyas, Ghullat, Aga Khanis, Usoolis, Imamis, Shaikis, Akhbaris, etc) but it should be remembered that for each sect in existence today, there are dozens more which died out. There are fiver, sixer, sevener, niner, elevener, twelver, fourteen-er Shia.

In Shia belief, it is Kufr (disbelief) to falsely ascribe Imamah to an individual who is not really the Imam. As such, each Shia sect looks down upon the other Shia sects as Kufaar (disbelievers) since they follow a different chain of Imamah. An unbiased outsider would no doubt find this amusing, but the Ithna Ashari Shia is adamant when he looks down on Ismailis, Aga Khanis, Bohras, Druze, and other Shia sects, unable to see the same inaneness about himself. In their own circles, the Ithna Ashari Shia scoff at Ismailis and look at them as a silly minority of heretics. Little do these same Ithna Ashari Shia realize that the vast majority of the Ummah (namely the Ahlus Sunnah) looks down upon the Ithna Ashari Shia in the same way. Shi’ism is simply a collection of heretics of every different color.

Even the way a Shia has to identify himself is reflective of the number of sects at every turn: the Shia must describe himself as not just an Ithna Ashari but rather as Ithna Ashari Imami Usooli Jaffari Shia.

Twelver Ithna Ashari Shi’ism was never the predominant sect of Shi’ism like it is today; it was as marginal as the rest of the Shia sects. The only reason that the Twelver Ithna Ashari Shia have become so predominant is simply because of the actions of one man: Shah Ismail I, ruler of the Safavid Empire. He converted to Ithna Ashari Shi’ism because he wanted to oppose the dominant Ottoman Empire which was Sunni. So Ismail I made Ithna Ashari Shi’ism the official state religion and forced the entire Persian population to convert to Shi’ism or accept the penalty of death. This was the Shia Inquisition against the Sunnis of Persia, who made up the majority of the population in Persia up until this point.

If it had not been for Shah Ismail I, the Ithna Ashari sect would have died out just like the other dozens of Shia sects died out; or at most, it would have been a marginal sect like all the other obscure Shia sects (including Ismailis, Druze, Bohras, etc). Had Shah Ismail I converted to the Druze Shia sect, then the majority of Shia today would be Druze. It was simply chance that the Ithna Ashari sect became the dominant Shia sect; had Shah Ismail I not been born, then the chances are that the majority of Shia alive today would not be Ithna Ashari.

Despite the multitude of Shia sects, they are the same: they are all false religions which use their fabricated Hadith to justify their own Imams. These Shia criticize the Sunnis for not following the Imams, but they themselves can’t agree on who the Imam is! How fickle are the Shia that they can attribute divine appointment at whim!

The truth is that there is no such thing as Imamah, and the Doors of Prophethood have forever been closed with the Prophet Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم). There is nobody after him, and anyone who claims this is a Dajjal. The last Prophet was Muhammad (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) and his name was mentioned in the Quran. Where are these other so-called Infallible Imams in the Quran? Why did Allah not include them? Certainly that would have cleared up the mass confusion amongst the various Shia sects. Will the Shia then not understand the folly in their ways and how far they have strayed away from the Quran?

Edited by Atif_khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Atif_Khan - Intellectual responses require genuine question. Not garbage that has not intellectual or academic basis.

Why dont you take each accusation in your copy pasted article one by one and post it as a question with some kind of historical/intellectual/factual argument to back it and we will take it from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't u give a read to my initial article? it wont take longer than two mins probably.Its not about the denial of Imamat, its about debunking the myth of "divine appontments" and infallibity.The point which i want to make is that the era of Imamat was full of crisis and confusions are shia did not have a uniform thought about the Imams.

The specific hadith u mentioned in sahi Bukhari has a different interpretation but right now lets not jump to that issue.Im repeating my one-liner for u as u hate to read long posts. "Are the fivers still muslims according to the ithna Ashari after rejecting the 7 Imams?"

Even Sunnis are Muslims so forget the # of Imams to be followed. But one cannot deny #12 imams who are from the lineage of Prophet's daughter and cousin Imam Ali (as) as is the Mehdi as mentioned in your Authentic hadiths is the son of Fatima (as). They were the most knowledgable but were kept in prisons, tortured, murdered by so-called dictator Muslim kings who called themselves Caliphs of Muslims.

Edited by zakzaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Sunnis are Muslims so forget the # of Imams to be followed. But one cannot deny #12 imams who are from the lineage of Prophet's daughter and cousin Imam Ali (as) as is the Mehdi as mentioned in your Authentic hadiths is the son of Fatima (as). They were the most knowledgable but were kept in prisons, tortured, murdered by so-called dictator Muslim kings who called themselves Caliphs of Muslims.

Lets assume that even we sunni believe in 12 Imams. There are alot of sects with in shia religion which originated during the era of Imamat and they differ on the number of Imams or who Imam should be. There is a historic evidence that many shia sects used to do Tabara on the Imams cz according to them he was a usurpur.

Yaqoob kuliani has recorded 17 narrations in the chapter "Bab fard ata't Ayema" which tell us that the obedience of the Imam of the time is compulsory. One page 187 he reccords from Hazrat Imam jafar al sadiq Rha that he said that our obedience is must and whoever denies us is kafir. In the light of the this , what will happen to the many shia sects who dont believe in the 12?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets assume that even we sunni believe in 12 Imams. There are alot of sects with in shia religion which originated during the era of Imamat and they differ on the number of Imams or who Imam should be. There is a historic evidence that many shia sects used to do Tabara on the Imams cz according to them he was a usurpur.

Yaqoob kuliani has recorded 17 narrations in the chapter "Bab fard ata't Ayema" which tell us that the obedience of the Imam of the time is compulsory. One page 187 he reccords from Hazrat Imam jafar al sadiq Rha that he said that our obedience is must and whoever denies us is kafir. In the light of the this , what will happen to the many shia sects who dont believe in the 12?

We are not like the Salafis who call all others disbelievers who do not agree with their view point.

The facts are there and there is no compulsion in religion, and Allah has left for us the Quran and the Ahlebaith (as) to be followed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are not like the Salafis who call all others disbelievers who do not agree with their view point.

The facts are there and there is no compulsion in religion, and Allah has left for us the Quran and the Ahlebaith (as) to be followed.

Thats fine. Why do u believe in Tabara against the sahaba rza then? they rejected ur one Imam (allegedly) and the fivers reject ur 7 Imams, the ismaili 7rs reject 5 and they dont accept Imam Musa kadim (may God be pleased with him). secondly , the differences on Imamat makes one thing evident and thats is that Imamat is not a divine institution composed of the Infallibles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The hadith that I mentioned has no classical commentary on it from Sunni scholars. Don't lie.

The 21st century salafi muhadith Shiekh nasir ud din Albani RA has done a very comprehensive summary on this hadith in his Sharah e sahih Bukhari.

Edited by Atif_khan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...