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

The Light Behind The Cloud

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

The Light behind the Cloud

Qa'im Muhammad

“He will be walking in their market and treading between them until Allah permits him.”

Hey brother,I need your help with my one question.I am asking this question from you in particular because by reading your past posts(which were to some extent related to my question) I think you have much knowledge in this issue.I could not find my answer from past posts that is why I am asking this question here.Your help will be highly appreciated.If you don't know it's answer kindly inform me so that I know.I asked this few days ago but no one responded me.Maybe because only few shiachat users have knowledge of this issue.

Question=Is there any scholar of shia-imami from past & present who believes that we normal shias can also become as much beloved in view of God as Prophet Muhammad,his daughter(Fatima) & his 12 sucessors.

I know many scholars believe that scholars of prophet Muhammad's ummah can become superior than prophets of past ages i.e yaqoob,yosuf,shoaib etc and few of them even believe that scholars can become more superior even than ulil-azam messengers except last prophet.

Is there any scholar of shia-imami who believe that we can be equal in rank with that of the rank of 14 infallibles?

If somebody believe the above,is he to be considered out of fold of shiasm or islam?Is it necessary to believe that we can't reach status of Prophet and his 12 successors in order to remain muslim or shia(i.e is this believe amongst zaruriat-deen or mazhab)?

Edited by Haydar Husayn
Unnecessarily long quote
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

The Twelvers uphold that the Hidden Imam exists “in-between time” on a higher plain – one can interact with him metaphysically through dreams and other visionary and spiritual experiences, but this does not interrupt his state of occultation.[

Are you sure?

 

This is referenced in Henry Corbin and Amir-Moezzi's books. The Imam is in a position where he's not aging, not in our exact time-space realm, not visible or at least not recognizable in the ordinary physical sense, yet he makes occasional appearances to scholars and individuals via dreams and sober encounters. In other words, the Mahdi is in a unique state unlike ours - he's not an ordinary person with a long lifespan, hiding in a cave or traveling as a bedouine - he is on a metaphysical plain. Recognition of him is on the metaphysical level. Please read Ziyara Jami`a al-Kabira.

 

Here is something from Shaykh al-Ahsa'i on the subject: http://www.almoterfy.com/site/index.php?act=showNews&module=news&id=1556#.VH4OXHvsZp9

Edited by Qa'im
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

This is referenced in Henry Corbin and Amir-Moezzi's books. The Imam is in a position where he's not aging, not in our exact time-space realm, not visible or at least not recognizable in the ordinary physical sense, yet he makes occasional appearances to scholars and individuals via dreams and sober encounters. In other words, the Mahdi is in a unique state unlike ours - he's not an ordinary person with a long lifespan, hiding in a cave or traveling as a bedouine - he is on a metaphysical plain. Recognition of him is on the metaphysical level. Please read Ziyara Jami`a al-Kabira.

Here is something from Shaykh al-Ahsa'i on the subject: http://www.almoterfy.com/site/index.php?act=showNews&module=news&id=1556#.VH4OXHvsZp9

Zeyarah is long, quote the relevant part.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

 اَلسَّلامُ عَلى اَئِمَّةِ الْهُدى، وَمَصابيحِ الدُّجى، وَاَعْلامِ التُّقى، وَذَوِى النُّهى، وَاُولِى الْحِجى، وَكَهْفِ الْوَرى، وَوَرَثَةِ الاَْنْبِياءِ، وَالْمَثَلِ الاَْعْلى، وَالدَّعْوَةِ الْحُسْنى، وَحُجَجِ اللهِ عَلى اَهْلِ الدُّنْيا وَالآخِرَةِ وَالاُْولى وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ، اَل

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

اَلسَّلامُ عَلى اَئِمَّةِ الْهُدى، وَمَصابيحِ الدُّجى، وَاَعْلامِ التُّقى، وَذَوِى النُّهى، وَاُولِى الْحِجى، وَكَهْفِ الْوَرى، وَوَرَثَةِ الاَْنْبِياءِ، وَالْمَثَلِ الاَْعْلى، وَالدَّعْوَةِ الْحُسْنى، وَحُجَجِ اللهِ عَلى اَهْلِ الدُّنْيا وَالآخِرَةِ وَالاُْولى وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكاتُهُ، اَل

Well.....

I'm not sure what do you see in that quote but the shikh awhad idea isn't your idea. Besides, the shikh was talking about all imams, not just the hidden imam. Plus hadith from imam Sadiq is not speaking about a phantom

الأمامة والتبصرة: عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ الْحِمْيَرِيُّ، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلَالٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ، عَنْ فَضَالَةَ بْنِ أَيُّوبَ، عَنْ سَدِيرٍ قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ يَقُولُ: إِنَّ فِي الْقَائِمِ سُنَّةً مِنْ يُوسُفَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ.

قُلْتُ: كَأَنَّكَ‏ تَذْكُرُ خَبَرَهُ‏ أَوْ غَيْبَتَهُ‏؟ فَقَالَ لِي: وَ مَا تُنْكِرُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ، أَشْبَاهُ الْخَنَازِيرِ، إِنَّ إِخْوَةَ يُوسُفَ كَانُوا أَسْبَاطاً أَوْلَادَ أَنْبِيَاءَ، تَاجَرُوا يُوسُفَ وَ بَايَعُوهُ، وَ هُمْ إِخْوَتُهُ وَ هُوَ أَخُوهُمْ فَلَمْ يَعْرِفُوهُ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ: «أَنَا يُوسُفُ» فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ- فِي وَقْتٍ مِنَ الْأَوْقَاتِ- يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَسْتُرَ حُجَّتَهُ؟! لَقَدْ كَانَ يُوسُفُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ إِلَيْهِ مُلْكُ مِصْرَ، وَ كَانَ بَيْنَهُ وَ بَيْنَ وَالِدِهِ مَسِيرَةُ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ يَوْماً، فَلَوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُ مَكَانَهُ لَقَدَرَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ، وَ اللَّهِ لَقَدْ سَارَ يَعْقُوبُ وَ وُلْدُهُ عِنْدَ الْبِشَارَةِ مَسِيرَةَ تِسْعَةِ أَيَّامٍ مِنْ بَدْوِهِمْ إِلَى مِصْرَ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ يَفْعَلُ بِحُجَّتِهِ مَا فَعَلَ بِيُوسُفَ أَنْ يَكُونَ يَسِيرُ فِي أَسْوَاقِهِمْ، وَ يَطَأُ بُسُطَهُمْ، وَ هُمْ لَا يَعْرِفُونَهُ؟ حَتَّى يَأْذَنَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُمْ بِنَفْسِهِ كَمَا أَذِنَ لِيُوسُفَ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ: هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ، قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

كمال الدين وتمام النعمة: حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي وَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالا حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ الْحِمْيَرِيُّ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلَالٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ عَنْ فَضَالَةَ بْنِ أَيُّوبَ عَنْ سَدِيرٍ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع يَقُولُ‏ إِنَّ فِي الْقَائِمِ سُنَّةً مِنْ يُوسُفَ قُلْتُ كَأَنَّكَ‏ تَذْكُرُ خَبَرَهُ‏ أَوْ غَيْبَتَهُ‏ فَقَالَ لِي وَ مَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَشْبَاهُ الْخَنَازِيرِ أَنَّ إِخْوَةَ يُوسُفَ كَانُوا أَسْبَاطاً أَوْلَادَ أَنْبِيَاءَ تَاجَرُوا يُوسُفَ وَ بَايَعُوهُ وَ هُمْ إِخْوَتُهُ وَ هُوَ أَخُوهُمْ فَلَمْ يَعْرِفُوهُ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ‏ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ فِي وَقْتٍ‏ مِنَ الْأَوْقَاتِ يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَسْتُرَ حُجَّتَهُ عَنْهُمْ لَقَدْ كَانَ يُوسُفُ يَوْماً مَلِكَ مِصْرَ وَ كَانَ بَيْنَهُ وَ بَيْنَ وَالِدِهِ مَسِيرَةُ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ يَوْماً فَلَوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَ تَعَالَى أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُ مَكَانَهُ لَقَدَرَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ وَ اللَّهِ لَقَدْ سَارَ يَعْقُوبُ وَ وُلْدُهُ عِنْدَ الْبِشَارَةِ فِي تِسْعَةِ أَيَّامٍ إِلَى مِصْرَ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ يَفْعَلُ بِحُجَّتِهِ مَا فَعَلَ بِيُوسُفَ أَنْ يَكُونَ يَسِيرُ فِيمَا بَيْنَهُمْ وَ يَمْشِي فِي أَسْوَاقِهِمْ وَ يَطَأُ بُسُطَهُمْ وَ هُمْ لَا يَعْرِفُونَهُ حَتَّى يَأْذَنَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ لَهُ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُمْ نَفْسَهُ كَمَا أَذِنَ لِيُوسُفَ ع حِينَ قَالَ لَهُمْ‏ هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

تفسير نور الثقلين: باسناده الى سدير قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: في القائم شبه من يوسف عليه السلام قلت: كأنك‏ تذكر خبره‏ أو غيبته‏؟ فقال لي: ما تنكر من ذلك هذه الامة أشباه الخنازير؟ ان اخوة يوسف كانوا أسباطا و أولاد أنبياء تاجروا يوسف و بايعوه و هم اخوته و هو أخوهم فلم يعرفوه‏ حتى قال لهم: انا يوسف، فما تنكر هذه الامة ان يكون الله عز و جل في وقت من الأوقات يريد ان يبين حجته، لقد كان يوسف عليه السلام ملك مصر و كان بينه و بين والده مسيرة ثمانية عشر يوما، فلو أراد الله عز و جل ان يعرفه مكانه لقدر على ذلك و الله لقد سار يعقوب و ولده عند البشارة مسيرة تسعة أيام من بدوهم الى مصر، الى مصر، فما تنكر هذه الامة ان يكون الله عز و جل يفعل بحجته ما فعل بيوسف، ان يسير في أسواقهم و يطأ بسطهم و هم لا يعرفونه حتى يأذن الله عز و جل ان يعرفهم نفسه كما أذن ليوسف حتى قال لهم: «هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
I'm not sure what do you see in that quote but the shikh awhad idea isn't your idea.

 

Didn't say it was. Please refer to my references in post #1 and #4. As for Shaykh al-Ahsa'i's discussion on `Alam al-Awwal, refer to this part and others:

 

وأما أمر ظهوره عجل الله فرجه وبيان زمانه ومكانه فاعلم أن الدنيا هذه قد خاف فيها من الأعداء فلما فر من هذه المسماة بالدنيا انتقل إلى الأولى والخلق يسيرون إليها لكنه عليه السلام سريع السير فقطع المسافة في لحظة والناس يسيرون إلى الأولى يسير بهم التقدير سير السفينة براكبها في هذا النهر الراكد الذي هو الزمان

 

Besides, the shikh was talking about all imams, not just the hidden imam.

 

The Imams, including the Qa'im, are all flesh and blood human beings, but with metaphysical noor natures as well. Recognition of the Imam is not just recognizing his face and body, it is knowing his reality and his status. This applies whether an Imam is apparent or hidden. The "in between time" comment is referring to the Mahdi's current state - ghayba is not just "hiding". When I am hiding under my bed from the people, I am not in "ghayba".

 

Plus hadith from imam Sadiq is not speaking about a phantom

 

The Imam is not a phantom and this is a misrepresentation of my view. As for the famous narration you posted, comparing the Mahdi to Yusuf (as), it does not contradict what I have said. The Qa’im is compared to Yusuf because Yusuf was presumed dead and subsequently lived in seclusion, making significant but incognito appearances to others. But even then, do you believe the the Mahdi's ghayba is identical to Yusuf's? That the Mahdi is in a jail, or working as a minister for a government somewhere?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Chatroom Moderators
Jazakallah for your effort.

 

This is by no means a comprehensive or fully-considered review. However, I did feel the need to jot down some points while reading your article, and later expanded upon them. I hope that this does not come off too critical a review and that you find it useful.

 

While the overall theme of the article is clearly inspired - initially and partly at least - by Kohlberg's paper, the article serves more as a historical account, and a description, of the Imamiyya and their key creeds pertaining to the particularity of key distinguishing tenet of Imami Imamism - i.e. the Imamate and its possessor, and then the number of such possessors and the explanation for the disapperance of the current possessor. In contrast, Kohlberg's article had actually put forward a ?new theory, arguing for the transformation of the Imamiyya into the Ithna `Ashariyya via the post-justification of a two part tenet (that of a line of 12 Imams, with the 12th in a temporary disapperance; hence explaining the current absence of an Imam) which was justified and legalised by a few key Imami/Ithna `Ashari scholars scouring the texts in search what was apt for their needs, due to the circumstances. In that light, your article does not seem to have such an aim in arguing for the correctness of the Imamiyya/Ithna `Ashariyya, although it does advocate a much less "problematic" "transformation". Although, I am not sure it properly addresses a theory of transformation, even though it does mention a transmission.

 

The article instead serves as a welcome and needed description of the Imamiyya/Ithna `Ashariyya by someone who is not trying to disagree with "orthodox" Shia Islam for the sake of disagreeing, as much of academia more-or-less is, and is a welcome account amidst the numerous attempts to contradict orthodoxy and faith (e.g. Arjomand), or recast Shiism in a different light (e.g. Amir-Moezzi), etc. Thus, it can be said that the article's sufficient lack of arguing for its own case and claims, and its lack of a "new" theory, is not a detriment, but rather an unnecessity that would unduly lengthen the article.

 

With that said, what the article itself wanted to be, regardless of your intentions, was something like Jassim Hussain's book, which, despite being relatively very old now, probably remains the most outstanding, in-depth yet concise, wide-ranging piece of research into the historical ghaybah, its people, and the Imamiyya/Ithna `Ashariyya in the English language, (rendering it a shining example of the weakness of academia as a whole). What I mean is that Jassim Hussain too puts forward the narrative of the Imamis/Ithna `Asharis, he discusses the history of ideas like the ghaybah, etc. as you do. However, he goes further. The point is not that he went into more detail, but that he actually considered the sources and origins of the key ideas, discussed alternative accounts and claims, argues (even if implicitly) for a correct position with evidences, etc. 

 

The article also failed to address some issues which would have been appropriate considering an aim of the article to educate, and strengthen one's faith. For example, the ignorance of the Shia regarding the 12th Imam, this two-part tenet, - an ignorance that stretched to include some of the Shia scholars - is a point of criticism raised against the validity of the faith, and even a brief defence would be appreciated.

 

A discussion on apparent weaknesses may also have been apt. For example, although there are "narrations on the dual occultation of the Mahdi", their scarcity in unique number (without checking, Nu`mani probably gathered most of them), and their unreliability in their transmission (in both technical and "truer" perspectives) might indeed evidence that this was just an idea floating out there in the form of a narration, as opposed to a belief held by at least some of the scholars in those times.

 

The article also is regrettably not concerned with referencing every claim or piece of information, but rather with sourcing some particular contributions (such as Amir-Moezzi's interpretation, which is probably against the dhahir of the final tawqi` and the two-ghaybahs hadith, and hence the interpretation probably needed to be substantiated), some papers (such as Kohlberg's), and some ideas and accounts.

 

This becomes particularly regrettable when the article ends up making some statements that may need evidencing, or directions for further reading, such as "Tusi reports a tradition from Fadl b. Shadhan that says that the misguided will enter Paradise because “the Silent One will not speak”, and "all while the Batriyya remained suspicious of the more esoteric side of Shiism". Some terminologies were also not explained for the unfamiliar, such as "Qat`i Imams".

 

Various points, ideas and references in your article bespeak of a large dependence on academia (whether directly or through others) for a significant amount of the knowledge there, - deduction and personal research aside. While academia can be a very useful resource, one should be careful not to adopt certain ideas, perspectives etc. For example, your demarcation between concepts such as `aql and naql, and eostericism and other than that, are seemingly implied far too strongly, while in reality, such a clear demarcation may not necessarily the case. For example, we see Saduq, a supposed traditionalist, rejecting the literal meaning of various narrations, advocating figurative explanations in tafsir of some verses, using rational arguments to argue against rival groups, etc. Or, for example, the mention of as-Saffar and al-Barqi, an echo from Kohlberg's paper, neglects to mention, and take into account, various other pre-ghaybah authors, such as the authors of the surviving Usul, Qurb al-Isnad, etc.

 

Some of these comments may apply more to how your point or intention came across as opposed to what you actually meant. In any case, the article was well-written and stands as a concise introduction to the history of that period and of those ideas.

Edited by Cake
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I appreciate the article and it is something I can never do. One criticism or problem I mainly have with it, is the dependency of western academic sources. Why is it that a select few brothers on here are so engulfed in this idea to justify Islam through the understanding and interpretation of western academics? I mean do we Shia's not have outstanding research down by our own breathe taking ulema? All you are doing is tainting the true understanding of our religion, for they can never and will never comply with the foundations made by our own scholars. It will always be in conflict.

(Wasalam)

Edited by PureEthics
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

I appreciate the article and it is something I can never do. One criticism or problem I mainly have with it, is the dependency of western academic sources. Why is it that a select few brothers on here are so engulfed in this idea to justify Islam through the understanding and interpretation of western academics? I mean do we Shia's not have outstanding research down by our own breathe taking ulema? All you are doing is tainting the true understanding of our religion, for they can never and will never comply with the foundations made by our own scholars. It will always be in conflict.

(wasalam)

 

I think you're well aware that I'm hardly someone who relies on academia when it comes to my beliefs and arguments. Before ever writing this, I compiled a book on the 12th Imam based on traditional sources, and translated parts of Kamal ad-Deen and Tusi's Ghayba. Our sources must precede secular ones, but there's nothing wrong with writing a piece that is of an academic genre. As Cake mentioned, most academics write from a skeptical or pessimistic stance, while my article uses fairly reputable academic sources to reinforce orthodox conclusions and summarize beliefs and past events.

 

While the overall theme of the article is clearly inspired - initially and partly at least - by Kohlberg's paper, the article serves more as a historical account, and a description, of the Imamiyya and their key creeds pertaining to the particularity of key distinguishing tenet of Imami Imamism - i.e. the Imamate and its possessor, and then the number of such possessors and the explanation for the disapperance of the current possessor. In contrast, Kohlberg's article had actually put forward a ?new theory, arguing for the transformation of the Imamiyya into the Ithna `Ashariyya via the post-justification of a two part tenet (that of a line of 12 Imams, with the 12th in a temporary disapperance; hence explaining the current absence of an Imam) which was justified and legalised by a few key Imami/Ithna `Ashari scholars scouring the texts in search what was apt for their needs, due to the circumstances. In that light, your article does not seem to have such an aim in arguing for the correctness of the Imamiyya/Ithna `Ashariyya, although it does advocate a much less "problematic" "transformation". Although, I am not sure it properly addresses a theory of transformation, even though it does mention a transmission.

 

Thank you for your detailed review. To be honest, I have not read Kohlberg's paper in years, besides just the first page of it (which was referenced at the beginning of my article). This was not designed to be a critique, summary, or response to Kohlberg's article, and I'm fairly certain that I haven't brought anything "new" to the table. This was simply meant to be a summary of historical events with no real thesis or argument. It is a primer for those who are interested in jumping into the history of ghayba.

 

With that said, what the article itself wanted to be, regardless of your intentions, was something like Jassim Hussain's book, which, despite being relatively very old now, probably remains the most outstanding, in-depth yet concise, wide-ranging piece of research into the historical ghaybah, its people, and the Imamiyya/Ithna `Ashariyya in the English language, (rendering it a shining example of the weakness of academia as a whole). What I mean is that Jassim Hussain too puts forward the narrative of the Imamis/Ithna `Asharis, he discusses the history of ideas like the ghaybah, etc. as you do. However, he goes further. The point is not that he went into more detail, but that he actually considered the sources and origins of the key ideas, discussed alternative accounts and claims, argues (even if implicitly) for a correct position with evidences, etc.

 

I have not read Jassim Hussain's book, but I would certainly be interested in checking it out. I appreciate that he takes my argument further, and into more detail, and considers alternative, but this is a whole book on the topic that is presumably being sold. Not everyone has access to Mr. Hussain's book, and so a short summary like mine would be a painless starting point for aspiring readers.

 

The article also failed to address some issues which would have been appropriate considering an aim of the article to educate, and strengthen one's faith. For example, the ignorance of the Shia regarding the 12th Imam, this two-part tenet, - an ignorance that stretched to include some of the Shia scholars - is a point of criticism raised against the validity of the faith, and even a brief defence would be appreciated.

 

Can you perhaps provide a few examples, or be more specific brother?

 

A discussion on apparent weaknesses may also have been apt. For example, although there are "narrations on the dual occultation of the Mahdi", their scarcity in unique number (without checking, Nu`mani probably gathered most of them), and their unreliability in their transmission (in both technical and "truer" perspectives) might indeed evidence that this was just an idea floating out there in the form of a narration, as opposed to a belief held by at least some of the scholars in those times.

 

The idea of a dual occultation fairly strong, so a rijal discussion on its authenticity is not too necessary in my opinion. Although if you are interested, here is Kulayni's narration on the subject:

 

 

محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن ابن محبوب، عن إسحاق بن عمار قال: قال أبوعبدالله (عليه السلام): للقائم غيبتان: إحداهما قصيرة والاخرى طويلة، الغيبة الاولى لا يعلم بمكانه فيها إلا خاصة شيعته، والاخرى لا يعلم بمكانه فيها إلا خاصة مواليه.

 

 

Muhammad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from ibn Mahbub from Is`haq b. `Ammar.

 

He said: I heard Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام say: The Qa’im has two occultations (ghaybataan): the first will be short, and the second will be long. In the first occultation, no one will know his whereabouts except his devoted Shi`a, and in the other [occultation] no one will know his whereabouts except his special supporters (khasat mawali). (al-Kafi)

 

This is found in al-Kafi (i.e. pre major ghayba), and it is muwathaq.

 

Besides this, we find some narrations in Nu`mani's book, and some in Tusi's Ghayba, including in Fii Nusrat al-Waqifa, showing that the idea was present well over a century before the major ghayba began.

 

This becomes particularly regrettable when the article ends up making some statements that may need evidencing, or directions for further reading, such as "Tusi reports a tradition from Fadl b. Shadhan that says that the misguided will enter Paradise because “the Silent One will not speak”

 

From Tusi's ghayba, the narrations from Fadl b. Shadhan's work:

 

ابن أبي عمير، عن جميل بن دراج، عن زرارة، عن جعفر بن محمد عليهما السلام أنه قال: حقيق على الله أن يدخل الضلال الجنة. فقال زرارة: كيف ذلك جعلت فداك ؟. قال: يموت الناطق ولا ينطق الصامت، فيموت المرء بينهما فيدخله الله الجنة.

 

ibn Abi `Umayr from Jameel b. Darraj from Zurara from Ja`far b. Muhammadعليهما السلام  that he said:

 

It is the right upon Allah that He admits the misguided into Paradise. So he said: How is it that, may I be your ransom? He said: The Speaker will die, and the Silent will not speak, and the person between them will die, so Allah will admit him into Paradise. (Tusi’s Ghayba)

 

Various points, ideas and references in your article bespeak of a large dependence on academia (whether directly or through others) for a significant amount of the knowledge there, - deduction and personal research aside. While academia can be a very useful resource, one should be careful not to adopt certain ideas, perspectives etc. For example, your demarcation between concepts such as `aql and naql, and eostericism and other than that, are seemingly implied far too strongly, while in reality, such a clear demarcation may not necessarily the case. For example, we see Saduq, a supposed traditionalist, rejecting the literal meaning of various narrations, advocating figurative explanations in tafsir of some verses, using rational arguments to argue against rival groups, etc.

 

Of course Saduq believed in batini concepts, and Mufid believed in traditional sources - when we say one is a traditionalist and the other is a rationalist, it is not an absolute statement. It is a generality that suggests that one scholar corresponded to one trend more than another. The works of Saduq and Mufid are of a different flavour, even if they profess the same core beliefs. It is similar to how we'd describe Sufism as "mystical", even though Islam altogether is fairly mystical when compared to most other religious traditions.

 

r, for example, the mention of as-Saffar and al-Barqi, an echo from Kohlberg's paper, neglects to mention, and take into account, various other pre-ghaybah authors, such as the authors of the surviving Usul, Qurb al-Isnad, etc.

 

In the context that as-Saffar and al-Barqi were referenced in, I was saying that neither deal with the concept of dual occultation. This also applies to Qurb, the Ja`fariyyat, and other works of that era. The exception here I suppose would be Fii Nusrat. If there are other sources that mention this idea, please let me know.

 

Thank you for your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

I think you're well aware that I'm hardly someone who relies on academia when it comes to my beliefs and arguments. Before ever writing this, I compiled a book on the 12th Imam based on traditional sources, and translated parts of Kamal ad-Deen and Tusi's Ghayba. Our sources must precede secular ones, but there's nothing wrong with writing a piece that is of an academic genre. As Cake mentioned, most academics write from a skeptical or pessimistic stance, while my article uses fairly reputable academic sources to reinforce orthodox conclusions and summarize beliefs and past events.

 

I know brother, I understand. I just have yet to read an article written by our brothers/sisters on here, which is sourced from our ulema. For I just want to envision their style of great mind when I read a research paper on an imami topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I know brother, I understand. I just have yet to read an article written by our brothers/sisters on here, which is sourced from our ulema. For I just want to envision their style of great mind when I read a research paper on an imami topic.

 

Maybe because that would be more like a translation and a commentary of their interpretation of what the sources say. It's not very appealing to most people who want individual researches and no bias. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Well.....

I'm not sure what do you see in that quote but the shikh awhad idea isn't your idea. Besides, the shikh was talking about all imams, not just the hidden imam. Plus hadith from imam Sadiq is not speaking about a phantom

الأمامة والتبصرة: عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ الْحِمْيَرِيُّ، عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلَالٍ، عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ، عَنْ فَضَالَةَ بْنِ أَيُّوبَ، عَنْ سَدِيرٍ قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ يَقُولُ: إِنَّ فِي الْقَائِمِ سُنَّةً مِنْ يُوسُفَ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ.

قُلْتُ: كَأَنَّكَ‏ تَذْكُرُ خَبَرَهُ‏ أَوْ غَيْبَتَهُ‏؟ فَقَالَ لِي: وَ مَا تُنْكِرُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ، أَشْبَاهُ الْخَنَازِيرِ، إِنَّ إِخْوَةَ يُوسُفَ كَانُوا أَسْبَاطاً أَوْلَادَ أَنْبِيَاءَ، تَاجَرُوا يُوسُفَ وَ بَايَعُوهُ، وَ هُمْ إِخْوَتُهُ وَ هُوَ أَخُوهُمْ فَلَمْ يَعْرِفُوهُ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ: «أَنَا يُوسُفُ» فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ- فِي وَقْتٍ مِنَ الْأَوْقَاتِ- يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَسْتُرَ حُجَّتَهُ؟! لَقَدْ كَانَ يُوسُفُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ إِلَيْهِ مُلْكُ مِصْرَ، وَ كَانَ بَيْنَهُ وَ بَيْنَ وَالِدِهِ مَسِيرَةُ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ يَوْماً، فَلَوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُ مَكَانَهُ لَقَدَرَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ، وَ اللَّهِ لَقَدْ سَارَ يَعْقُوبُ وَ وُلْدُهُ عِنْدَ الْبِشَارَةِ مَسِيرَةَ تِسْعَةِ أَيَّامٍ مِنْ بَدْوِهِمْ إِلَى مِصْرَ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ يَفْعَلُ بِحُجَّتِهِ مَا فَعَلَ بِيُوسُفَ أَنْ يَكُونَ يَسِيرُ فِي أَسْوَاقِهِمْ، وَ يَطَأُ بُسُطَهُمْ، وَ هُمْ لَا يَعْرِفُونَهُ؟ حَتَّى يَأْذَنَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُمْ بِنَفْسِهِ كَمَا أَذِنَ لِيُوسُفَ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ: هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ، قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

كمال الدين وتمام النعمة: حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي وَ مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا قَالا حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ الْحِمْيَرِيُّ عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلَالٍ عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي نَجْرَانَ عَنْ فَضَالَةَ بْنِ أَيُّوبَ عَنْ سَدِيرٍ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع يَقُولُ‏ إِنَّ فِي الْقَائِمِ سُنَّةً مِنْ يُوسُفَ قُلْتُ كَأَنَّكَ‏ تَذْكُرُ خَبَرَهُ‏ أَوْ غَيْبَتَهُ‏ فَقَالَ لِي وَ مَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَشْبَاهُ الْخَنَازِيرِ أَنَّ إِخْوَةَ يُوسُفَ كَانُوا أَسْبَاطاً أَوْلَادَ أَنْبِيَاءَ تَاجَرُوا يُوسُفَ وَ بَايَعُوهُ وَ هُمْ إِخْوَتُهُ وَ هُوَ أَخُوهُمْ فَلَمْ يَعْرِفُوهُ حَتَّى قَالَ لَهُمْ‏ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ فِي وَقْتٍ‏ مِنَ الْأَوْقَاتِ يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَسْتُرَ حُجَّتَهُ عَنْهُمْ لَقَدْ كَانَ يُوسُفُ يَوْماً مَلِكَ مِصْرَ وَ كَانَ بَيْنَهُ وَ بَيْنَ وَالِدِهِ مَسِيرَةُ ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ يَوْماً فَلَوْ أَرَادَ اللَّهُ تَبَارَكَ وَ تَعَالَى أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُ مَكَانَهُ لَقَدَرَ عَلَى ذَلِكَ وَ اللَّهِ لَقَدْ سَارَ يَعْقُوبُ وَ وُلْدُهُ عِنْدَ الْبِشَارَةِ فِي تِسْعَةِ أَيَّامٍ إِلَى مِصْرَ فَمَا تُنْكِرُ هَذِهِ الْأُمَّةُ أَنْ يَكُونَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ يَفْعَلُ بِحُجَّتِهِ مَا فَعَلَ بِيُوسُفَ أَنْ يَكُونَ يَسِيرُ فِيمَا بَيْنَهُمْ وَ يَمْشِي فِي أَسْوَاقِهِمْ وَ يَطَأُ بُسُطَهُمْ وَ هُمْ لَا يَعْرِفُونَهُ حَتَّى يَأْذَنَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ لَهُ أَنْ يُعَرِّفَهُمْ نَفْسَهُ كَمَا أَذِنَ لِيُوسُفَ ع حِينَ قَالَ لَهُمْ‏ هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

تفسير نور الثقلين: باسناده الى سدير قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: في القائم شبه من يوسف عليه السلام قلت: كأنك‏ تذكر خبره‏ أو غيبته‏؟ فقال لي: ما تنكر من ذلك هذه الامة أشباه الخنازير؟ ان اخوة يوسف كانوا أسباطا و أولاد أنبياء تاجروا يوسف و بايعوه و هم اخوته و هو أخوهم فلم يعرفوه‏ حتى قال لهم: انا يوسف، فما تنكر هذه الامة ان يكون الله عز و جل في وقت من الأوقات يريد ان يبين حجته، لقد كان يوسف عليه السلام ملك مصر و كان بينه و بين والده مسيرة ثمانية عشر يوما، فلو أراد الله عز و جل ان يعرفه مكانه لقدر على ذلك و الله لقد سار يعقوب و ولده عند البشارة مسيرة تسعة أيام من بدوهم الى مصر، الى مصر، فما تنكر هذه الامة ان يكون الله عز و جل يفعل بحجته ما فعل بيوسف، ان يسير في أسواقهم و يطأ بسطهم و هم لا يعرفونه حتى يأذن الله عز و جل ان يعرفهم نفسه كما أذن ليوسف حتى قال لهم: «هَلْ عَلِمْتُمْ ما فَعَلْتُمْ بِيُوسُفَ وَ أَخِيهِ إِذْ أَنْتُمْ جاهِلُونَ قالُوا أَ إِنَّكَ لَأَنْتَ يُوسُفُ قالَ أَنَا يُوسُفُ وَ هذا أَخِي‏.

I think you horribly misunderstood his point, and it seems you didn't even bother to read his posts. Usually the point of referencing is to show that something isn't your idea, but you're still using it to support your idea ( I hope that's clear enough for you). 

And no, you're wrong on Sheikh al-Ahsa'i. Yes the all Imams are Hujjah on Alim al-Awla (from the quote Qa'im gave you that you skipped), but none of them have crossed the plains to Alim al-Awla like Imam al-Hujjah (as) has. That's the point. The Imam (as) is not a phantom either, you misunderstood the point that all the veils of the earth are uncovered for him, if we can say that for a lot of Scholars, why not for the  Imam (as)? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Didn't say it was. Please refer to my references in post #1 and #4. As for Shaykh al-Ahsa'i's discussion on `Alam al-Awwal, refer to this part and others:

وأما أمر ظهوره عجل الله فرجه وبيان زمانه ومكانه فاعلم أن الدنيا هذه قد خاف فيها من الأعداء فلما فر من هذه المسماة بالدنيا انتقل إلى الأولى والخلق يسيرون إليها لكنه عليه السلام سريع السير فقطع المسافة في لحظة والناس يسيرون إلى الأولى يسير بهم التقدير سير السفينة براكبها في هذا النهر الراكد الذي هو الزمان

The Imams, including the Qa'im, are all flesh and blood human beings, but with metaphysical noor natures as well. Recognition of the Imam is not just recognizing his face and body, it is knowing his reality and his status. This applies whether an Imam is apparent or hidden. The "in between time" comment is referring to the Mahdi's current state - ghayba is not just "hiding". When I am hiding under my bed from the people, I am not in "ghayba".

The Imam is not a phantom and this is a misrepresentation of my view. As for the famous narration you posted, comparing the Mahdi to Yusuf (as), it does not contradict what I have said. The Qa’im is compared to Yusuf because Yusuf was presumed dead and subsequently lived in seclusion, making significant but incognito appearances to others. But even then, do you believe the the Mahdi's ghayba is identical to Yusuf's? That the Mahdi is in a jail, or working as a minister for a government somewhere?

Salam. I'm not criticizing . I'm genuinely asking because this is new to me.

Let me break my question then comment on your last comment.

My question is : in your first post you stated that it is established in imammyiah that imam Mahdi exist in a realm that is in between times. Then you gave references of Corbin and moazzi. Can you support that general statement from classical Shia books, maybe naming 7 different scholars who say that this is the Shia creed?

My comments on your last post :

Full recognition of the imamah reality a is nearly impossible. Prophet said to imam Ali : no one knows you except me and Allah. People are expected to recognize them as their leaders at least.

Their description in the quoted part of zeyarah is hardly beyond the leadership part. Maybe modern day leadership concept is not strong enough to carry the meaning of imamah. I don't know. But a leader is like a father, like shelter, like the most popular and beloved scholar, like a master etc.

Recognition of other aspects of them is up to the momin ability and imaan. Salman alfarsi may Allah be pleased with him was few ranks below the perfect imaan. Abu ther was few ranks below Salman , yet prophet said : if abu ther knew what are the thoughts of Salman, he would kill him (considering him heretic). I know that shiachatter are in love with taqsir and ghuluu discussion, I couldn't care less.

The usage of the term metaphysical might be inaccurate. We do use the term manzillah to refer to their other aspects. Methodical carry with it an assumptions and an already formed image about physical and metaphysical.

I'm aware of the other realms thoughts among Shia scholars. But these realms are not the parallel universe theories of physics. All these realms are actually one, but we don't see them due to veil, something that imams has overcome. I am Ali said : if the veil was removed, my certainty will not increase. And this thought is in Quran too فكشفنا عنك غطائك فبصرك اليوم حديد.

These realms are varying depth and details of reality. Jins are around us and with us. Each one of us got an assigned jin with him called qareen. There are 2 angels always around us, the 2 writers of good and bad deeds. But we don't see them because of the veils.

I brought the had it not to draw a comparison but to draw attention to the last part. I am is walking in our markets, sitting in our majalis. Imam is the emir of hajj every year, he dose not skip a year. But if you

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is this hadith attributed to Imam Baqir regarding the line of the Unjust one on the day of judgement, "O would I wish I took a way with the Messenger" to mean taking Ali as a Wali.

 

Could it mean taking a way with the Messenger implies a companionship of Master and apprentice? Are those who take the place of the Messenger fulfilling that role? Is the same position of Ali's Wilayah and thus we would be taking Ali was a Wali?

 

I'm not too sure how literal the "with the Messenger" is, does imply a companion or can it mean just taking him as a guide?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...