The Light Behind The Cloud

[Qa'im]

The Light behind the Cloud

Qa'im Muhammad

 

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

 

Succession in the institution of Imamate was a contentious matter during the formative period of Imami Shiism. The doctrine of Imamate “evolved gradually” during the first century AH, and was given a “definitive shape” by the death of Ja`far b. Muhammad as-Sadiq (c. 148 AH).[1] While Madelung attributes this shape to Hisham b. al-Hakam,[2] a Kufan champion of Imami theology and companion of Ja`far as-Sadiq, a pantheon of Shiite personalities influenced and codified the development of this institution. An examination into Twelver Imamate would be incomplete without an inquiry into its culmination: the occultation. The disappearance of the last Imam, or the Mahdi, is a belief that was upheld by many sects during the infancy and formative period, including the Kaysaniyya, the Nawusiyya, the Fat`hiyya, the Mubarakiyya, the Waqifa, and the Twelvers. The doctrine of occultation grew in sophistication between the first and third Islamic centuries through the sayings and writings of different personalities, schools, and sects. This article will explore the historical development the concept of occultation, its influences, and its implications in classical Shiism.

 

                Disagreements over who would inherit the Imamate would demonstrate a popular uncertainty in the expected number of Imams. In the lifetime of Ja`far as-Sadiq, it became clear to the growing Imami community that a rightful Imam would need to be explicitly designated (nass) by his paternal predecessor, and that he would have the right to the Caliphate and the leadership of the Muslim world.[3] Although Ja`far as-Sadiq was certainly not the originator of the concept of Imamate, his chiefly place amongst Medinan scholars and his relative freedom vis-à-vis other Imams allowed him to elaborate on the subject to his principal Kufan students. He taught that the Imam was not only a contestant to political authority, but also as a legal and spiritual guide of Muslims everywhere.[4] The death of Ja`far as-Sadiq would mark a major split in the Shiite community over his succession. The triumph of the Abbasid revolution made it difficult for Ja`far as-Sadiq to articulate his designation; and upon his death, the Shiites flocked to several descendants of his, including `Abdullah al-Aftah, Muhammad b. Isma`il, Musa al-Kadhim, and even the deceased Isma`il b. Ja`far. Soon afterwards, the Fat`hiyya would mostly join Musa al-Kadhim, either as Imamis, or as ardent upholders in the Imamate of `Abdullah al-Aftah. One group, the Nawusiyya, held that Ja`far was the living Mahdi in occultation. Later, after the death of Musa al-Kadhim, a faction led by `Ali b. Abi Hamza claimed that Musa was indeed the living Mahdi in occultation.

 

                This crisis poses a dilemma: the final number of Imams and the sequence of who would take office was perhaps unknown to major students of Ja`far as-Sadiq and the Shiite populace in general. Still, the split demonstrates that a number of important doctrines were upheld by all of the groups, including:

1. The rule that there would be one immaculate (ma`sum) Imam at all times, chosen by the preceding Imam. For all of the mentioned sects, this would either be a hidden Imam or an apparent one.
2. The culmination of the Imamate with the Mahdi, a messianic figure who would fill the world with justice and peace as it would be fraught with injustice and tyranny.
3. The expectation that the Mahdi would enter into an occultation sometime during his life, usually due to an imminent danger.

While the Sunnis did not share these three ideas, they became central to Imami theology. Zaydis generally do not necessitate one Imam at all times, but they have certainly flirted with messianism.[5] The historical Zaydis carried a more nascent view of Imamate: an Imam was simply a pious leader from the Prophet’s tribe who rises with a sword to fight against the tyrannical forces. In Zaydi theology, the world can be devoid of an Imam, and there can even be multiple Imams at a given time – including lesser Imams, who are more scholastic and less revolutionary. This is reflective of the “conciliatory” role that the Zaydis took in the 2^nd century AH, merging various Islamic trends, from the traditionalists of Medina and Kufa to the Mu`tazilite theologians and logicians.[6] Still, there was a great deal of nuance among Zaydi sects and personalities in their respective views on Imamate. The Husayniyya, a messianic Zaydi religious movement in Yemen, claimed that its leader was the expected Mahdi. After his death, the sect upheld that he was actually the hidden Saviour, who would soon bring justice to the Earth.[7] Abu’l Jarud (d. c. 140-150 AH), the founder of the Jarudiyya, was a prominent student Muhammad al-Baqir and a narrator of his ahadith. While some Zaydis were notably hostile towards the Twelver Imams, Abu’l Jarud relied heavily on Muhammad al-Baqir, and he transmits traditions from Abu ‘t-Tufayl `Amer b. Wathila (d. ~100 AH), the Kaysani strongman and sahabi.[8] In the Twelver hadith corpus, Abu’l Jarud even narrates traditions on the twelve Imams and the occultation of the Mahdi. Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Sa`eed b. `Uqda, an esteemed Zaydi jurist in third century Baghdad, also related explicit traditions on these subjects to Nu`mani. Abu Sa`eed `Abbad al-`Asfari (d. 250 AH), a Jarudi scholar in Kufa, likewise recorded traditions on there being twelve Imams over ten years before the death of Hasan al-`Askari (260 AH). What we can extract from these four examples is that some Zaydis certainly remained loyal to Imami authorities and perhaps embraced some of their ideas on the institution of Imamate, all while the Batriyya remained suspicious of the more esoteric side of Shiism.

 

Perhaps the most esoteric concept in Twelver Imamology is the occultation (ghayba). The Twelver account is that prior to Hasan al-`Askari’s death, he had secretly sired a son in either 255 or 256 AH[9] with an African bondwoman or with Narjis, the granddaughter of Bardas, the Byzantine Caesar. Although the early Twelver chroniclers recount several eyewitness reports to the child’s birth and early life, the child was concealed from the populous. The twelfth Imam’s existence was so discrete that it allowed several non-Twelver sects to arise after Hasan al-`Askari’s death amidst the perplexity caused by the apparent vacuum. At least eleven fragments made opposing claims; from upholding the Imamate of Ja`far al-Kadhab, to claiming that Hasan al-`Askari’s deceased brother Muhammad b. `Ali was the occulted Mahdi, to the belief that Hasan al-`Askari was still the living Imam, to the complete cessation of Imamate.[10] Twelver authorities found themselves trying to prove the twelfth Imam’s existence and his Qa’imiyya whilst negating the claims of imposters and deviant sects. This transition from Imamiyya to Twelverism proved difficult for chroniclers, who needed to codify a doctrine in harmony with the oral and written Shiite tradition.

 

A primary source of direction in the Twelver community was the ambassadorship of the four representatives of the twelfth Imam: `Uthman al-`Amri, Muhammad b. `Uthman, Husayn b. Ruh an-Nawbakhti, and `Ali b. Muhammad as-Simuri. These ambassadors (sufara’) would oversee the headquarters (nahiya), a hierarchy of scholars and tax-collectors loyal to the later Qat`i Imams[11], and occasionally sent out letters and orders issued by the Imam. `Uthman al-`Amri was a loyal associate of the ninth, tenth, and eleventh Imams, and received the explicit praise of the latter two according to two traditions in Kulayni’s collection through Ahmad b. Is`haq. His son, Muhammad b. `Uthman, would inherit the seat after his death. After Muhammad b. `Uthman died, his daughter Umm Kulthum helped secure the succession of Ibn Ruh an-Nawbakhti,[12] a charismatic theologian from the prominent family of scholars. This safir would prove to be influential even independently of the Imam, as he was asked a series of historical questions by his constituents. Several accounts survive in which Ibn Ruh discusses the virtues of Fatima, the martyrdom of Husayn, the role of prophets, the controversial death of Musa al-Kadhim, and various other issues. He would also address the chiliasts and the extremists (ghulat), and debate false claimants to the Imam’s representation – most notably, Shalmaghani. Moreover, the Hidden Imam communicated most with his adherents during Ibn Ruh’s supervision. The Imam’s epistles, which focused mostly on matters related to Islamic jurisprudence and khums taxes, became an affirmation of his existence, his Imamate, and his competence, as they were collected and brandished in the works of Kulayni, Saduq, and others. The epistles even demonstrated the miraculous knowledge of the twelfth Imam, who, on many occasions, seemed to have access to very specific information about his clients, their belongings, their future, and their enemies. This would further reinforce the idea that the Imam, in his station, had the supernatural ability to access the knowledge of the occult.

 

The minor occultation was important to the triumph of Twelver Shiism over competing factions. The Twelvers would win over most of the early dissidents during the minor occultation, and, according to one account, eventually take in a repented Ja`far al-Kadhab.[13] Ja`far’s denial of the existence of his nephew, the twelfth Imam, would attract the followers of Faris b. Hatim, a renegade proselytizer and tax collector who broke away from `Ali al-Hadi’s influence during his Imamate.[14] Ja`far’s denial of his brother’s offspring was challenged by Hasan al-`Askari’s own mother, who opposed Faris’ group and Ja`far.[15] Eventually, according to an epistle of the Hidden Imam preserved by Saduq, Ja`far, in effect, became a Twelver and recognized his Imam. Although this claim cannot be independently verified, Saduq would have presented this information shortly after the events we have described, and no alternative account exists.

 

 Sa`d b. `Abdullah, a Twelver scholar and heresiographer of that period, also recorded the dissent of Muhammad b. Nusayr, the founder of the historical Alawite sect. Ibn Nusayr was a companion of `Ali al-Hadi and Hasan al-`Askari who then claimed to be the rightful gateway to the twelfth Imam. His main confidant was Ahmad b. Hilal, described by Saduq in Kamal ad-Deen as the only man to have converted from Shiism to nasb. While nasb is usually associated with those who have opposed the Ahl al-Bayt, the word nassab may also mean imposter, fraud, and conman. This definition would make more sense, because Ahmad b. Hilal was accused of both extremism (ghulu) and nasb. He was probably labelled an extremist due to his support for the Nusayris, who would raise `Ali b. Abi Talib to Godhood and adopt reincarnation; [16] and he was probably associated with nasb for his opposition to the Imam’s secretariat and his creation of a new sect. Beyond the Alawites, there were other extremists whom the Twelver authorities would need to deflect. Shalmaghani later nationalistically claimed that the Hashimite Imam was the devil and that the real Imam in occultation was a Persian from the House of Chosroes.[17] While the minor occultation symbolized a harmonization between the traditionalist, rationalist, and esoteric trends in Imami Shiism, explicit measures were taken against the heresies of some esotericists. In Tabrisi’s Ihtijaj, the Hidden Imam harshly condemns the ghulat; and in the epistle of Is`haq b. Ya`qub, he calls those who have denied Husayn’s death blasphemers. The latter is a reference to those who believed that Husayn and his companions were not killed, but were raised (like Jesus) to Paradise. The move of the holy seat of the Imam’s secretariat to Baghdad sometime after Hasan al-`Askari’s death[18] and the appointment of Ibn Ruh an-Nawbakhti may also be seen as pro-rationalist stances. Ibn Ruh also built strong ties with the Qummi traditionalists during his term. His administration can be seen as a grounding force that attempted to unify the Twelvers upon strong `aqli and naqli foundations whilst combatting the esoteric ghulat and millenialists that rose to prominence in the third Islamic century. This characterization can be further noted in the works of Saduq, Mufid, Murtada, and Tusi, which further focus on traditional, jurisprudential, and rational theology.

 

The third ambassador died in 326 AH and he was succeeded by as-Simuri, whose period in office was brief and relatively obscure.[19] The most notable event at this time was the Imam’s announcement to as-Simuri that he would die in six days, and that no one was to be appointed in his place. This would mark the beginning of the major occultation and a new wave of perplexity (heyra) in the Twelver community.

 

Confusion would permeate the major occultation when the death of as-Simuri further raised questions on the state of the twelfth Imam. Both Nu`mani and Saduq attempted to address the confusion of Shiites in this period, with the latter writing an extensive refutation of non-Twelver sects in the outset of his Kamal ad-Deen. It was at this time when narrations on the dual occultation of the Mahdi would gain utmost relevance, as they provided an explanation for the new phase of the occultation[20] that satisfied skeptics and temporarily curtailed the attitudes of chiliasts. The first to utilize these narrations were in fact the Waqifa, who identified Musa al-Kadhim’s two terms in prison as his two periods of occultation. Neither as-Saffar nor al-Barqi mention the dual occultation in their respective works, but Kulayni inserted a tradition of this genre from Ja`far as-Sadiq into his al-Kafi during the minor occultation. This demonstrates that, by the time of as-Simuri, the expectation of a second occultation may have been present in some Twelver scholastic circles. Furthermore, Nu`mani wrote his Kitab al-Ghayba shortly after the death of as-Simuri, which documented other traditions from the sixth Imam on the dual occultation.

 

What was the proposed reason for the occultation? Both Kulayni and Saduq present reports from Zurara b. A`yan which say that the Qa’im would go into occultation due to his fear of being killed. The Hidden Imam, in his minor occultation, claimed that all of his predecessors were forced to pledge allegiance (bay`a) to the despot of their time, making his occultation an escape from their clutches. Other narrations cite the occultation as being part of an ambiguous test of faith, which only the truest Shiites would pass – doing away with the hypocrites and those of little faith.

 

                The physical abode of the occulted Imam is also worthy of discussion. For Kaysanis, Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya (d. 81 AH) was the Mahdi, and he was alive in occultation at Mount Radwa[21] protected by lions and angels. For the Waqifa, Musa al-Kadhim’s prison sentence sufficed as an occultation. One Waqifi report preserved in Tusi’s Ghayba appropriates the Kaysani idea that the Mahdi would be upon Mount Radwa and applies it to Musa al-Kadhim after his alleged “escape” from the Abbasid prison.[22] This demonstrates that the early, pre-developed idea of occultation was a physical seclusion of the Mahdi in a remote or isolated area. During the lives of the first eleven Imams, the Imamis studied the doctrine of occultation and its theological precedents through their Kaysani, Nawusi, Fat`hi, and Waqifi peers and predecessors. One of the most influential pre-occultation Imami theologians to have written on the topic was Fadl b. Shadhan (d. 260), a contemporary of the later Imams who had compiled his own Kitab al-Ghayba based on the narrations of the Imams and their students. Fadl’s reports were preserved by Tusi and would become an important source for occultation theology and eschatology. All of those who wrote about the occultation, including Fadl, relied on both Imami and non-Imami authorities in order to fully illustrate the concept.

 

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.[23] In a number of narrations, the Qa’im is compared to the Biblical prophet Joseph,[24] because Joseph was presumed dead and subsequently lived in seclusion, making significant but incognito appearances to others. Likewise, the Hidden Imam’s existence was questioned, he was unseen and unrecognized by his followers, and rumours of his death arose.[25] Saduq records that during the outset of the minor occultation, `Uthman al-`Amri claimed to have seen twelfth Imam whilst at Hajj, saying that he would visibly perform the pilgrimage every year. Soon afterwards, others would claim to have met the Imam on an incidental basis.[26] These traditions challenge the former idea that the Mahdi would be restricted to a confined area during his occultation, and submits the idea that the Hidden Imam manifests himself into both material and immaterial forms, often unbeknownst to those perceiving him.

 

While the Sunnis did not formalize a belief in occultation, they did have some noteworthy encounters with the concept. Immediately after the death of the Prophet, `Umar claimed that Muhammad had not died, but was still alive, and that he had “gone to his Lord as Moses went and remained hidden from his people for forty days”.[27] Although this is normally perceived to be `Umar’s emotional reaction to the death of the Prophet, it is nonetheless a strange response that may have had theological implications. Saduq would later compare the prolonging of the Mahdi’s occultation to Moses’ forty-day isolation in Kamal ad-Deen. Additionally, Qurtubi wrote in his tafsir that al-Khidr and Elijah were still alive, making occasional appearances to pious men and women. This lends credibility to the idea that righteous men can live a millennia whilst in seclusion, even after the cessation of prophethood in Muhammad.

 

                One “dual occultation” tradition found in al-Kafi is supplemented with the notion that some of the Mahdi’s followers would retain contact with him during the second phase of his occultation. Here, Ja`far as-Sadiq says that the Mahdi’s “special clients” (khasat mawali) would “know his place”. The relatively ambiguous language of this hadith can perhaps be understood through its Waqifi rendition, which says that the Mahdi would be looked after by his slave (mawla) during his second occultation.[28] The letter sent to as-Simuri prior to his death condemns those who will claim to have witnessed him during the second occultation; however, this witnessing (mashahada), according to Amir-Moezzi, is referring to a claim to his ambassadorship and representation.[29] Although the meaning of this has been contested by Twelver scholarship, this interpretation can give credence to the numerous accounts of episodic appearances of the Mahdi in Shiite history.

 

The Imams highlighted the need for their followers to stick to their books and the narrators of their sayings during the perplexity of the occultation. Soon after the death of as-Simuri, Nu`mani, Saduq, Mufid, Murtada, and Tusi would further develop the theology of occultation with an `aqli and naqli harmonization of the Imams’ sayings and of past events.

 

                For Twelvers, an occulted Imam is not an absent Imam. Believers are still expected to recognize the Mahdi during his occultation just as they are to recognize his predecessors. Without physical access to their Imam, adherents have a unique relationship with him: praying for his well-being and for the hastening of his return, sending salutations and benedictions to him, preparing for his reappearance and weeping at its delay. In one of Kulayni’s traditions, Ja`far as-Sadiq emphasizes the intensifying need for dissimulation prior to “the affair” – the return and triumph of the Ahl al-Bayt. Another narration implies that the punishment of stoning is to be halted until the revolution of the Qa’im. Interestingly, Tusi reports a tradition from Fadl b. Shadhan that says that the misguided will enter Paradise because “the Silent One will not speak”. The “Silent One” is an occulted or inactive Imam, and so perhaps due to the difficulty in accurately recognizing him, God would not hold some deviants accountable on the Day of Resurrection. Still, in order to have cognizance of God and attain His utmost favour, recognition of His representative is necessary. All in all, perhaps the best depiction of the occultation is in an allegory that the Saviour himself presented in the epistle of Is`haq b. Ya`qub: “And as to the benefit from me in my occultation, then it is that of the Sun when it is concealed from the eyes in the clouds. And surely, I am a safeguard for the inhabitants of the earth, like the stars are the safeguards for the inhabitants of the sky. So, lock the door of questioning regarding that which is not meant for you, and do not task yourself beyond the knowledge of that which suffices you”.

[1] Kohlberg, From Imamiyya to Ithna Ashariyya, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, pp. 521

[2] Madelung, Hisham b. al-Hakam

[3] Jafri, The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam, pp. 197

[4] Jafri, The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam, pp. 197

[5] Jafri, The Origins and Early Development of Shi’a Islam, pp. 186

[6] Ibid, pp. 186

[7] Daftary, A History of Shi’I Islam

[8] Madelung, Abu’l Jarud Hamadani, Encyclopedia Iranica, I/3 pp. 327-328

[9] According to two conflicting narrations in Kulayni’s al-Kafi on the birth of the twelfth Imam

[10] Amir-Moezzi, The Spirituality of Shi’i Islam, pp. 443 footnotes

[11] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 498

[12] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 498

[13] From the famous narration of Is`haq b. Ya`qub from the Hidden Imam: As to the course of my uncle, Ja`far and his son, then it is that of the brothers of [the prophet] Joseph.

[14] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 500

[15] Ibid, pp. 508

[16] Tusi’s Kitab al-Ghayba, quotation of Sa`d b. `Abdullah’s Maqalat.

[17] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 508

[18] Ibid, pp. 502

[19] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 508

[20] Amir-Moezzi, The Spirituality of Shi’i Islam, pp. 440

[21] Arjomand, The Crisis of the Imamate and the Institution of Occultation in Twelver Shi’ism, pp. 492

[22] Tusi, Fii Nusrat al-Waqifa from his Kitab al-Ghayba

[23] Corbin, En Islam iranien, volume 4, pp. 330

[24] There may be a connection here to the mystical Jewish concept of a Messiah son of Joseph.

[25] Amir-Moezzi, The Spirituality of Shi’i Islam, pp. 439

[26] Ibid, pp. 436

[27] Tarikh Tabari, Volume 9, pp. 185-186

[28] Tusi, Fii Nusrat al-Waqifa from his Kitab al-Ghayba

[29] Amir-Moezzi, The Spirituality of Shi’i Islam, pp. 446

Edited December 2, 2014 by Qa'im

[Dota~lover]

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 December 2, 2014 by Haydar Husayn
Unnecessarily long quote

[Chaotic Muslem]

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?

[Qa'im]

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 December 2, 2014 by Qa'im

[Chaotic Muslem]

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.

[Qa'im]

 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

[Chaotic Muslem]

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.

[Qa'im]

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?

[Cake]

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 December 2, 2014 by Cake

[Ethics]

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 December 2, 2014 by PureEthics

[Qa'im]

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.

[Ethics]

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.

[Abu'l Khattab]

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. 

[Ali Musaaa :)]

Dr Jassim M. Hussain's The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam: A Historical Background - http://www.al-islam.org/occultation-twelfth-imam-historical-background-jassim-m-hussain

[Abu'l Khattab]

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)? 

[Chaotic Muslem]

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

[Dota~lover]

 

Bro Qa'im,will you help plzz me with my above question?I would be very thankful to you.If you don't know it's answer then inform me so that I stop asking you anymore.

[StrugglingForTheLight]

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?

[baqar]

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

 

No, we cannot be.