Why Is Adl (justice) Part Of Usool Ad-deen?

[Ugly Jinn]

The questions:

1) What is the origin and reason behind the inclusion of Adl in Shia's Articles of Faith? (references explaining would help)

2) Why include one attribute of Allah and exclude the others?

3) Can a person still qualify as a Muslim if he believes in Adl (and the other 4 Articles of Faith) but rejects other attributes of Allah?

Edited September 17, 2011 by Ugly Jinn

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

Our scholars most likely took it from the Mu'tazilah, as many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. Their Usool al-Deen are:

1. Tawheed
   
2. `Adl
   
3. al-Wa`d wa al-Wa`eed (Promise and Threat)
   
4. al-Manzilah bayn al-Manzilatayn (Rank between two ranks)
   
5. Amr bi'l Ma'roof wa Nahi `anil Munkar
   

Notice the first two.

(salam)

Edited September 17, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

As far as I know these usooli e seen are not in our ahadees. Can someone confirm it plz?

[alimohamad40]

salaam

brother nader its rather the mutazila who took from us because we refer to the imams and the mutazila also refer to the imams

Adl is a logical derivative of the divine unity of god

god is one infinite indivisible omni present and all the other attributes relating to the unity

if he is limited and defined then he will need a creator and this circular logic will not stop until you reach a creator who is undefined and infinite

the reason is because the mind rejects circular logic

once you established that god is infinite and un-defined you look at the concept of good and evil which are logical concepts.

from observation of good and evil it is derived that evil stems from lacking

the infinite lacks nothing therefore he is all good

injsutice is bad and justice is good hence Allah is all just

the importance of gods justice amongst his attributes is the establishment of good and evil,,,,

its a hope for the creation.

[Nader Zaveri]

(salam)

(bismillah)

brother nader its rather the mutazila who took from us because we refer to the imams and the mutazila also refer to the imams

No brother this is an incorrect concept. From my research, this Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH), while the Usool al-Deen of the Mu'tazilah were defined way before the 5th century. We took many things from the Mu'tazilah, heavy reliance on mutawaatir and rejection of akhbaar aHaad was another Pro-mu'tazilah concept that al-Murtada also adopted.

There is no denying the many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. We also had scholars who switched from being Mu`tazilah to an Imaami (i.e. Muhammad bin `Abd al-Rahmaan bin Qibah al-Raazi).

585 محمد بن قبة الرازي

، يكنى أبا جعفر، من متكلمي الإمامية و حذاقهم و كان أولا معتزليا ثم انتقل إلى القول بالإمامة

Muhammad bin Qibah al-Raazi:

kunya Abaa Ja`far, he is from the kalaam scholars of the Imaamiyyah, clever, he was first a Mu`tazilah, then he transferred to the belief of Imaamah

Source:

• al-Toosi, al-Fihrist, pg. 132, person # 585
  

(salam)

Edited September 17, 2011 by Nader Zaveri

[The Green Knight]

It is the ahl-us-sunnah-wal-jamaat who used to be mu'tazillah before they created their sects, and why would we need to "take" anything from the mu'tazilla as if shi'a of Ali (as) came into being later like sunnis? If al-raazi or other honest pursuers of truth left mu'tazillah corrected themselves and reverted to shi'a islam then it still does not back up your absurd claim.

[aladdin]

(salam)

(bismillah)

No brother this is an incorrect concept. From my research, this Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH), while the Usool al-Deen of the Mu'tazilah were defined way before the 5th century. We took many things from the Mu'tazilah, heavy reliance on mutawaatir and rejection of akhbaar aHaad was another Pro-mu'tazilah concept that al-Murtada also adopted.

There is no denying the many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. We also had scholars who switched from being Mu`tazilah to an Imaami (i.e. Muhammad bin `Abd al-Rahmaan bin Qibah al-Raazi).

585 محمد بن قبة الرازي

، يكنى أبا جعفر، من متكلمي الإمامية و حذاقهم و كان أولا معتزليا ثم انتقل إلى القول بالإمامة

Muhammad bin Qibah al-Raazi:

kunya Abaa Ja`far, he is from the kalaam scholars of the Imaamiyyah, clever, he was first a Mu`tazilah, then he transferred to the belief of Imaamah

Source:

• al-Toosi, al-Fihrist, pg. 132, person # 585
  

(salam)

Do you know the literal definition of Mu'tazilah. Just I asked you the literal definition of qiyas and you couldn't give me, even though you cliam to know Arabic. You went here and there and couldn't give me the literal meaning of qiyas for very long time.

Here is a hint for you.

Both the Mu'tazilah and Ashrites are creation of the first sermon of Imam Ali (as), in his Najul Balagha. Don't tell me that Imam Ali (as) didn't write the Najul Balagha.

At that time, there were no such thing as Sunnis. Every one was Shia of someone. After the Mu'tazilah died away, then the Ashrites become Sunnis.

Not everything is hadiths. Hadiths is a minor part of complete Islam.

Edited September 17, 2011 by aladdin

[JimJam]

Actually both Mutazila and the Shia had the common belief that God is ever just and that he never is unjust to anyone which is what the Quran says, both movements were opposed to the injustice of that age's society.

[Yusufali 3:108] These are the Signs of Allah: We rehearse them to thee in Truth: And Allah means no injustice to any of His creatures.

[Yusufali 2:272] It is not required of thee (O Messenger), to set them on the right path, but Allah sets on the right path whom He pleaseth. Whatever of good ye give benefits your own souls, and ye shall only do so seeking the "Face" of Allah. Whatever good ye give, shall be rendered back to you, and ye shall not Be dealt with unjustly.

Edited September 17, 2011 by JimJam

[Abbas]

Salam Alaikum

The Usool-ud-Deen began as the two declaration of faith: The Tawheed of Allah, and the Risalah/Nabuwwah of Mohammad . Judgement Day is the whole point of this life, as well what happens on that day and after it. Due to major discussions in Ilm-ul-Kalaam with the Sunnis, the Shias proved that Adalah is a vital part of our belief in Allah, and a link between Tawheed and Nabuwwah, and they also proved the necessity of the continuation of guidance through Imamah. The scholars discussed these five things in depth in their books about Aqaid and Ilm-ul-Kalam, having these five as the five chapters in their books, and they came to be known as the five Usool-ud-Deen.

However, there are many things that are vital in our faith, which we can add to this list, such as angels, creation, ibadah, etc.

On the other hand, the most fundamental thing is Tawheed, from which all the other things branch off from.

But we stick to the Usool-ud-Deen when we discuss the beliefs of Islam, as they are key elements in our belief-system and provide a good heading for all other branches.

[aladdin]

Actually both Mutazila and the Shia had the common belief that God is ever just and that he never is unjust to anyone which is what the Quran says, both movements were opposed to the injustice of that age's society.

I am still waiting for Mr. Zaveri answer for the literal meaing of Mutazila and how it is connect to the first sermon of Imam Ali (as) in his first sermon of Najul Balagha?

[Abbas]

The Sunnis believed in Nabuwwah as one of the Usool-e-Deen, did we also take it from them?

Obviously, no. We believed in Tawheed, Adl, Nabuwwah, Imamah and Ma'ad due to the teachings of the Ahlul-Bayt [a].

The Mu'tazilah took Adl as a core belief, and in continuous discussions of this issue, the importance of this is undervalued. Being a major topic of discussion, distinguishing us from the majority of Sunnis, it was always a core belief of ours under Tawheed, but it was given a heading of its own.

In fact, Mu'tazilah and Imamiyyah may agree on Adl of Allah, in general, but there are differences in the details.

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

Salam Alaikum

The Usool-ud-Deen began as the two declaration of faith: The Tawheed of Allah, and the Risalah/Nabuwwah of Mohammad . Judgement Day is the whole point of this life, as well what happens on that day and after it. Due to major discussions in Ilm-ul-Kalaam with the Sunnis, the Shias proved that Adalah is a vital part of our belief in Allah, and a link between Tawheed and Nabuwwah, and they also proved the necessity of the continuation of guidance through Imamah. The scholars discussed these five things in depth in their books about Aqaid and Ilm-ul-Kalam, having these five as the five chapters in their books, and they came to be known as the five Usool-ud-Deen.

However, there are many things that are vital in our faith, which we can add to this list, such as angels, creation, ibadah, etc.

On the other hand, the most fundamental thing is Tawheed, from which all the other things branch off from.

But we stick to the Usool-ud-Deen when we discuss the beliefs of Islam, as they are key elements in our belief-system and provide a good heading for all other branches.

Nonsense deen and its usooli are what the imams asws say not that which u discuss with Sunnis and make. Tawheed is undoubtedly important so is adl with ihsaan with prophethood imamah rajat and quyama. Rajat is a vital issue but was ignored by hilli.

From the g ates of Allah asws we have

1. Foundation of islam (tawala and tabarra.

2. Daim ul islam are 5.

A. Wilayat.

B. Salat

c. Zakat.

d. Hajj.

E. Saum.

And emaan has 4 daim (correction for below mentioned)

3 We have emaan and it has foundation.

Edited September 17, 2011 by siraatoaliyinhaqqun

[aladdin]

I am still waiting for Mr. Zaveri answer for the literal meaing of Mutazila and how it is connect to the first sermon of Imam Ali (as) in his first sermon of Najul Balagha?

I see him that he is online on ShiaChat.com

[Abbas]

The actual beliefs of Islam include all of what you mentioned, there's no denying that. Some are fundamental, some branch off from other fundamentals, etc.

Nobody is denying that. One can come up with any list derived from the Quran and Hadeeths, according to each individual's understanding.

All that is said here is that what is commonly known as the "usool-ud-deen" are the headings under which the scholars such as Allamah Hilli discussed these issues of our belief-system. This five-point list doesn't cover everything, but it covers the basics from which one can proceed and research more.

Kids are also taught what are commonly as the Furoo-ud-Deen, but this list is also imcomplete. It merely includes the Ibadat part of Fiqh, and doesn't include Taharah. Mu'amalat and many other subjects of Fiqh are not included, although they encompass the majority of Fiqh. For example, in Wasail, volumes 4 to 16 only deal with what is mentioned in the Furoo-ud-Deen, while volumes 1-3, and 17-29 deal with other issues. The point of this list is to be a starting point, and it does not mean that the Furoo and Ahkam are limited to this.

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

The actual beliefs of Islam include all of what you mentioned, there's no denying that. Some are fundamental, some branch off from other fundamentals, etc.

Nobody is denying that. One can come up with any list derived from the Quran and Hadeeths, according to each individual's understanding.

All that is said here is that what is commonly known as the "usool-ud-deen" are the headings under which the scholars such as Allamah Hilli discussed these issues of our belief-system. This five-point list doesn't cover everything, but it covers the basics from which one can proceed and research more.

Kids are also taught what are commonly as the Furoo-ud-Deen, but this list is also imcomplete. It merely includes the Ibadat part of Fiqh, and doesn't include Taharah. Mu'amalat and many other subjects of Fiqh are not included, although they encompass the majority of Fiqh. For example, in Wasail, volumes 4 to 16 only deal with what is mentioned in the Furoo-ud-Deen, while volumes 1-3, and 17-29 deal with other issues. The point of this list is to be a starting point, and it does not mean that the Furoo and Ahkam are limited to this.

Bro when u say foundation is tawalla tabarra it actually is complete deen and imams asws being silent means we are to remain silent. How can we include one thing forgo others and these shias think the usooli furrow definition is from imams asws which is obviously not. Its hillism at best.

[aladdin]

(salam)

(bismillah)

No brother this is an incorrect concept. From my research, this Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH), while the Usool al-Deen of the Mu'tazilah were defined way before the 5th century. We took many things from the Mu'tazilah, heavy reliance on mutawaatir and rejection of akhbaar aHaad was another Pro-mu'tazilah concept that al-Murtada also adopted.

There is no denying the many of our classical scholar's teachers were Mu'tazilah. We also had scholars who switched from being Mu`tazilah to an Imaami (i.e. Muhammad bin `Abd al-Rahmaan bin Qibah al-Raazi).

585 محمد بن قبة الرازي

، يكنى أبا جعفر، من متكلمي الإمامية و حذاقهم و كان أولا معتزليا ثم انتقل إلى القول بالإمامة

Muhammad bin Qibah al-Raazi:

kunya Abaa Ja`far, he is from the kalaam scholars of the Imaamiyyah, clever, he was first a Mu`tazilah, then he transferred to the belief of Imaamah

Source:

• al-Toosi, al-Fihrist, pg. 132, person # 585
  

(salam)

Do you know the literal definition of Mu'tazilah. Just I asked you the literal definition of qiyas and you couldn't give me, even though you cliam to know Arabic. You went here and there and couldn't give me the literal meaning of qiyas for very long time.

Here is a hint for you.

Both the Mu'tazilah and Ashrites are creation of the first sermon of Imam Ali (as), in his Najul Balagha. Don't tell me that Imam Ali (as) didn't write the Najul Balagha.

At that time, there were no such thing as Sunnis. Every one was Shia of someone. After the Mu'tazilah died away, then the Ashrites become Sunnis.

Not everything is hadiths. Hadiths is a minor part of complete Islam.

[Gypsy]

No brother this is an incorrect concept. From my research, this Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH), while the Usool al-Deen of the Mu'tazilah were defined way before the 5th century. We took many things from the Mu'tazilah, heavy reliance on mutawaatir and rejection of akhbaar aHaad was another Pro-mu'tazilah concept that al-Murtada also adopted.

If we took the part of the God being just from Mutazilla (as per your claim), then prior to that, did we use to hold the Asharis like belief that "Allah swt could be unjust to HIS creation?"

[Abbas]

We have riwayaat saying that Tawheed is complete deen and the most crucial part of faith. Nothing is forgone, if we don't include this in our list of headings.

I agree that Tawalla and Tabarra is actually a part of faith, not ahkam, but what we do in the practical realm as a result of this comes under Ahkam. But one can say that Tawalla and Tabarra comes under the headings of Nabuwwah and Imamah, as we do Tawalla and Tabarra in relation to them.

Anyhow, the Shias need educating about their faith and actions, and plenty of it, especially those from the Indian Sub-Continent.

[aladdin]

I am waiting for Mr. Zaveri about his tall claim from hadith. Like I said:

Not everything is hadiths. Hadiths is a minor part of complete Islam.

Would he answer, or would he fail to answer like about the literal meaning of qiyas.

His understanding of Arabic language is very limited. However, with Google Translation and Google Search Engine on Online Hadiths, he comes accross as an alim.

[Abbas]

Salam Alaikum

Not everything is hadiths. Hadiths is a minor part of complete Islam.

Hadiths is not a minor part, its a major part.

And please do not bring your personal tit-for-tat stuff from one discussion to another.

The topic is about the Usool-e-Deen, not Zaveri's knowledge about it.

[The Green Knight]

Lanat upon liars, conspirators, ghulaat, nawasib and enemies of the ahl al-bayt (as).

[rotten_coconut]

It's more like the Mu`tazili had the concept of `adalah similar to Shi`i or they took that concept from Imam `Ali (as).

Probably, the more correct way to see this is while the concept of `adalah is a Shi`i concept, having a "list of usul ad-din" which include "tauhid as no.1, `adalah as no.2" might not be originated from Shi`i since the Aimmah (as) never explicitly listed such a thing.

[aladdin]

Hadiths is not a minor part, its a major part.

And please do not bring your personal tit-for-tat stuff from one discussion to another.

The topic is about the Usool-e-Deen, not Zaveri's knowledge about it.

When you combine everyting, Quran, Sunnah, Aymiyah, knowledge of Islam, Alim and so forth, then hadith becomes a minor part.

It is not tit or tat.

You, unfortunately are not a good reader

Mr. Zaveri claims that Shia usul ad-din are from Mu'tazilah, through the hadith, he has quoted above.

I am trying to prove to him that the Mu'tazilah and the Ashrites beliefs are from the first sermon of Imam Ali in Najul Balagha and that hadiths is not everything.

You, as usaul seems to have problem with everything concerning Mr. Zaveri, if I correctly remember.

I am simply asking him the literal meaning of Mu'tazilah, and how it relates to the first sermon of Imam Ali in Najul Balagha.

But, as usaul seems to have problem with everything concerning Mr. Zaveri, if I correctly remember.

Edited September 17, 2011 by aladdin

[guest 34193]

There's no doubt that this was in imitation of the Mu`tazila's systemization of five usool ad-deen, the Mu`tazila who also used to refer to themselves as the Ahl at-Tawhid wa 'l-`Adl. Such a classification I have seen neither in any hadiths nor in works prior to the Buyid era scholars of Baghdad (who were in heavy interaction with Mu`tazila scholars). In the works of such Imami scholars you can find a concepts and definitions that are straight from the works of such Mu`tazila scholars as Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar. That's not to say though they were Mu`tazili themselves, in fact the Mu`tazila were probably their biggest rivals at the time. But, to deny that there was a heavy influence, or claim it was the other way around is just being ignorant of history and the development of scholastic theology.

One is the lack of mention of this in the ahadith where you would expect such an important thing to be laid out if anywhere, but I have never seen this. For example, here is a risalat narrated on the authority of Imam Rida (as) that summarizes the religion, yet no mention of this scheme:

http://www.tashayyu....wami-ash-sharia

Then look at the works of our earlier scholars (earlier than the scholars I mentioned) and again I haven't see this. For instance, take Shaykh Saduq. Here's part of a summary of the religion he did:

http://www.tashayyu....gion---al-amali

Or here look at the beginning of his Kitab al-Hidaya that goes over the usool ad-deen:

http://www.*******.org/hidaya

Notice there is no separate mention of `adl as being an usool? Is it reasonable to think that Shaykh Saduq have been ignorant of there being such a fundamental scheme if it existed?

To be clear, it's not in saying this we come to the absurd conclusion that Allah is unjust (a`udhu billah), the issue is only in this fivefold scheme and it's origin.

[alimohamad40]

The confusion here is because some are referring to the essence of those beliefs and some are referring to who has labeled them with such names and listed them in such order

another point is that Usool aldeen are Aqaed which come from the human innate and i can tell you why adl is necessary for you to pick the right religion without referring to mutazili or any group.

just start from zero I think therefore i exist

this universe exists so how did it start

where did i come from

where am i going to

whats my role

the standard three questions that every philosopher asks

if i say the creator and originator is limited and finite then i will stay in the circular loop and ask again who created that creator?

the only way to go out of the circular logic loop is to end at a creator who is infinite and undefined and unbound

so this is tawheed , he must be one because the multiplicity of the entities means they will be limited .

so god is one and infinite

from observation of good and evil we know that evil stems from lacking

and we know that justice is good

therefore the infinite who lacks nothing is all good and hence is all just

this is adl just try to follow the flow

now since god is fair he must give his slaves the instructions on how to live and be happy

these instructions must be perfect because god will not order the slave to do the wrong thing at all

the method of communicating the instructions to the people must be safe to safeguard the perfection of the instructions.

therefore the carrier of the message needs to be Masoom (protected) from sin

god is just therefore the favor of isma will exist at all times and there would be no nation which will be disadvantaged

now give me one religion that agrees with all these logical implications other than the jafary religion

[siraatoaliyinhaqqun]

We have riwayaat saying that Tawheed is complete deen and the most crucial part of faith. Nothing is forgone, if we don't include this in our list of headings.

I agree that Tawalla and Tabarra is actually a part of faith, not ahkam, but what we do in the practical realm as a result of this comes under Ahkam. But one can say that Tawalla and Tabarra comes under the headings of Nabuwwah and Imamah, as we do Tawalla and Tabarra in relation to them.

Anyhow, the Shias need educating about their faith and actions, and plenty of it, especially those from the Indian Sub-Continent.

yes that's right. Tawheed and tawalla/tabarra are interrelated. If u say tawheen then it will have arkaan and kalima e tawheed will have shuroot.

And from ahadees we know that arkaan e tawheed and shuroot e kalima e tawheed are mohammad wa aale mohammad a.s.

And belief is also Amal and are interrelated. For e.g. Waiting for imam ajf's return is our belief as well as Amal with great reward(it's a worship)

dividing it had led to inclusion of ilm ul kalam with scant use of ahadees to back such claims

[Saimaaa]

Atlast i see someone asking the basic questions which need to be asked.

[Ugly Jinn]

Usool al-Deen of ours was not fully defined until the time of Shareef al-Murtada (355-436 AH),

Due to major discussions in Ilm-ul-Kalaam with the Sunnis, the Shias proved that Adalah is a vital part of our belief in Allah, and a link between Tawheed and Nabuwwah, and they also proved the necessity of the continuation of guidance through Imamah. The scholars discussed these five things in depth in their books about Aqaid and Ilm-ul-Kalam, having these five as the five chapters in their books, and they came to be known as the five Usool-ud-Deen

There's no doubt that this was in imitation of the Mu`tazila's systemization of five usool ad-deen, the Mu`tazila who also used to refer to themselves as the Ahl at-Tawhid wa 'l-`Adl. Such a classification I have seen neither in any hadiths nor in works prior to the Buyid era scholars of Baghdad (who were in heavy interaction with Mu`tazila scholars). In the works of such Imami scholars you can find a concepts and definitions that are straight from the works of such Mu`tazila scholars as Qadi `Abd al-Jabbar. That's not to say though they were Mu`tazili themselves, in fact the Mu`tazila were probably their biggest rivals at the time. But, to deny that there was a heavy influence, or claim it was the other way around is just being ignorant of history and the development of scholastic theology.

1. The Usool Ad-Deen (5) we have currently did not exist until centuries after the revelation of the Quran and occultation of the 12 Imam.
   
2. The origin of the concept Usool Ad-Deen are fallibles (Mu'tazilah), which centuries later fallible scholars imitated/took to define the Usool Ad-Deen which currently exists.
   
3. The fundamental Roots of Religion hasn't been clearly stated in the Quran, hence was defined centuries later by fallible scholars.
   
4. To complete the concept of Usool Ad-Deen hadiths are needed, hence Quran's revelation was not enough to define the fundamental Roots of Religion.
   
5. The need of fallible Hadiths to complete Usool Ad-Deen equates to a concept which logically cannot be given 100% divine seal.
   

There is more I can add, but this should be more than enough.

Edited September 18, 2011 by Ugly Jinn

[Gypsy]

It's more like the Mu`tazili had the concept of `adalah similar to Shi`i or they took that concept from Imam `Ali (as).

Probably, the more correct way to see this is while the concept of `adalah is a Shi`i concept, having a "list of usul ad-din" which include "tauhid as no.1, `adalah as no.2" might not be originated from Shi`i since the Aimmah (as) never explicitly listed such a thing.

So you mean making a list of items (Usul of Deen or Pillar of Religion or whatever) was not a standard Shia practice until after the time of the Imams?

But since nothing in the Shia Usul of Deen goes against the Quran or the teaching of the Prophet and his pure family so why do people make such a big fuss about Usul al Deen?

1. The Usool Ad-Deen (5) we have currently did not exist until centuries after the revelation of the Quran and occultation of the 12 Imam.
   

This is blatantly wrong. You think people were not aware of the belief in God, his Prophet, Ahlul Bayt and the rest of the Usools?

[Ugly Jinn]

This is blatantly wrong. You think people were not aware of the belief in God, his Prophet, Ahlul Bayt and the rest of the Usools?

Who is arguing about awareness? People were aware of alot of things like the other attributes of Allah.

Awareness and defining 5 specific Articles of Faith are totally different. Hence I am blatantly right.

Edited September 18, 2011 by Ugly Jinn

[rotten_coconut]

So you mean making a list of items (Usul of Deen or Pillar of Religion or whatever) was not a standard Shia practice until after the time of the Imams?

But since nothing in the Shia Usul of Deen goes against the Quran or the teaching of the Prophet and his pure family so why do people make such a big fuss about Usul al Deen?

Salam,

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my words. What I meant was the current list of Usuluddin (tawhid, `adalah, nubuwwah, imamah, ma`ad).

What we have from ahadith were quite different.

From the links that bro macisaac provided:

1. http://www.tashayyu....wami-ash-sharia

Here, we have the ahadith of "summary of halal & haram" which also called "usuluddin" at the end of the hadith, which listed tawhid of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, prophethood of Rasulullah (saww), truthfulness of Al-Qur`an, imamah, wudu, ghusl, salat, zakat, fasting, hajj, jihad, divorce, salawat, tawalla, tabarra', etc. `Adalah was just mentioned in passing, i.e. He...not opressing

2. http://www.tashayyu....gion---al-amali

This "summary of religion" mentioned belief in tawhid, nubuwwah, angels, divine books, imamah. Pillars of Islam are salat, zakat, fasting, hajj, & walayah to the Prophet (saww) & Aimmah (as). No specific mention of `adalah here.

3. http://www.*******.org/hidaya

It's also clear from here that according to Syakh Saduq, the major topics in belief are tawhid, nubuwwah, imamah, taqiyyah, etc. No specific mention of `adalah.

It doesn't mean that the concept of `adalah was foreign to Shi`i. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, in one of the view, Mu`talizi took their concept of `adalah from Imam `Ali (as). And as we can see from Nahjul Balaghah & ahadith from Aimmah (as), we can safely say that the true concept of `adalah came from the ma`sumin (as).

As for the current list of usuluddin, as we can see from the ahadith given in the links above, there's no reason to believe that the usuluddin are only these 5 & nothing else or even these list of 5 came from the Aimmah.

Personally, I don't have issues with this list of 5. But, I'm not agree if someone says that it's only this 5 because it's not the case.

Perhaps, the ones who don't agree with this list think that it's not correct to limit the usuluddin to only this 5. But, that's my guess. You have to ask them directly on this.

Edited September 18, 2011 by rotten_coconut

[alimohamad40]

Salam,

Perhaps I wasn't clear in my words. What I meant was the current list of Usuluddin (tawhid, `adalah, nubuwwah, imamah, ma`ad).

What we have from ahadith were quite different.

From the links that bro macisaac provided:

1. http://www.tashayyu....wami-ash-sharia

Here, we have the ahadith of "summary of halal & haram" which also called "usuluddin" at the end of the hadith, which listed tawhid of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, prophethood of Rasulullah (saww), truthfulness of Al-Qur`an, imamah, wudu, ghusl, salat, zakat, fasting, hajj, jihad, divorce, salawat, tawalla, tabarra', etc. `Adalah was just mentioned in passing, i.e. He...not opressing

2. http://www.tashayyu....gion---al-amali

This "summary of religion" mentioned belief in tawhid, nubuwwah, angels, divine books, imamah. Pillars of Islam are salat, zakat, fasting, hajj, & walayah to the Prophet (saww) & Aimmah (as). No specific mention of `adalah here.

3. http://www.*******.org/hidaya

It's also clear from here that according to Syakh Saduq, the major topics in belief are tawhid, nubuwwah, imamah, taqiyyah, etc. No specific mention of `adalah.

It doesn't mean that the concept of `adalah was foreign to Shi`i. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, in one of the view, Mu`talizi took their concept of `adalah from Imam `Ali (as). And as we can see from Nahjul Balaghah & ahadith from Aimmah (as), we can safely say that the true concept of `adalah came from the ma`sumin (as).

As for the current list of usuluddin, as we can see from the ahadith given in the links above, there's no reason to believe that the usuluddin are only these 5 & nothing else or even these list of 5 came from the Aimmah.

Personally, I don't have issues with this list of 5. But, I'm not agree if someone says that it's only this 5 because it's not the case.

Perhaps, the ones who don't agree with this list think that it's not correct to limit the usuluddin to only this 5. But, that's my guess. You have to ask them directly on this.

mutazilis do not have imamah and the nessesity of isma

its the only logical way to reach to imamah is through justice

if god is not just he doesn't need to send a masoom for all the periods of time and earth can be empty of a masoom at some time

[rotten_coconut]

mutazilis do not have imamah and the nessesity of isma

its the only logical way to reach to imamah is through justice

if god is not just he doesn't need to send a masoom for all the periods of time and earth can be empty of a masoom at some time

Salam,

I'm not sure what you meant by that. Of course, Mu'talizah doesn't have the concept of imamah since it's still a Sunni sect. In fact, as we can read in some books such as Murtada's Mutahhari's Divine Justice, the `adalah concept of Mu'tazilah is different from Shi`i concept.

And again, what being discussed here is not the content of each 5 usuluddin. Any Shi`i will accept the concept of tawhid, `adalah, nubuwwah, imamah, & ma`ad.

The discussion is on the list itself & the limitation of its being only 5.

[alimohamad40]

salaam

Salam,

I'm not sure what you meant by that. Of course, Mu'talizah doesn't have the concept of imamah since it's still a Sunni sect. In fact, as we can read in some books such as Murtada's Mutahhari's Divine Justice, the `adalah concept of Mu'tazilah is different from Shi`i concept.

And again, what being discussed here is not the content of each 5 usuluddin. Any Shi`i will accept the concept of tawhid, `adalah, nubuwwah, imamah, & ma`ad.

The discussion is on the list itself & the limitation of its being only 5.

yes because brother Zaveri was pointing out to the fact that the list of usool aldeen in the order that we see it today was initiated by the mutazila and it has been categorized in that way due to their influence because no such categorization is found prior to al shareef al murtadha in the shia sources

my point is that the mutazila will not have all the five but they will have the first three or four right ?

and if you ask the mutazila where did they get this listing will they say that their philosophers made it up?

I doubt that and i think there is text stating that and the fact that mutazila rely alot on imam Ali it could be that they had access to text that the shias didn't have access to...

The other point is that without referring to sources any human will reach these conclusions and the reasons these five are the base of everything is because they are the comprehensive guide to leading the person to the right religion and they are the questions that everyone will have to go through in order to choose a religion.

tawheed leads to the necessity of adl

adl leads to the necessity of judgment and necessity of isma

necessity of isma leads you to be a jafary because no other religion has that claim

if i doubt tawheed then i can be a triniterian

if i doubt adl then i can be an ash3ari or sunnie because i will doubt the necessity of the existence of masoom at all times and hence allow the belief that isma stopped after the prophet's death

the listing and the ordering of these concepts could be an ijtihad of some one but the essence is in the innate of any human and the search for the right religion will force you to ask all those five questions and maybe thats why it was listed that way

but I always thought why they separated imamah from nubowah ? the main idea is the necessity of the masoom

Edited September 18, 2011 by alimohamad40

[Gypsy]

Awareness and defining 5 specific Articles of Faith are totally different. Hence I am blatantly right.

How can you say that the submitting to Allah swt and accepting the Holy Prophet (pbuh) is simply a matter of awareness? Your whole purpose on earth is to worship the God. You submit your whole self to God and live by HIS laws. And we implement the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) in our daily lives.

And again, what being discussed here is not the content of each 5 usuluddin. Any Shi`i will accept the concept of tawhid, `adalah, nubuwwah, imamah, & ma`ad.

The discussion is on the list itself & the limitation of its being only 5.

There is no such limitation imposed on anyone. It is all in the head of people who think you become less of a Shia if you specify some of the fundamentals or some of the branches of the religion.

Edited September 18, 2011 by Zareen