Rising before the Qa'im

[Yahya313 44]

Salamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah.

Recently, a profile which I am sure everyone is aware of, that was defending YH and HA presented me with a set of Hadith against revolution before the Qaim:

 

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 310, 

Hadeeth number 483:

Omar ibn Handhala says, al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam said, “There are five signs before the rise of the Hujja ‘alaihissalam, the heavenly call, Sufyani, the sinking of the earth, the murder of the pure soul and Yamani.  I asked, may I be your ransom, If anyone from your House should make an uprise (khuruj: uprise or revolt to topple the government), should we make an uprise along with him?  He said, No.

If you are a Shi’a, then remember, it is prohibited until you hear the Saiha and that Yamani has appeared, to make an uprise.  That is unless the MI6 and CIA had paid Omar ibn Handhala to narrate this hadeeth.

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 264
Hadeeth number: 382
Our master Syed al-Sajjideen ‘alaihissalam said, “By Allah, no one makes an uprise from us before the Rise of the Awaited One, salamullahi ‘alaih, except that he will be like a nestling (baby bird), who flew off his nest before its wings grew, and kids pick him and play with him. 

Ibid # 383:
Says al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam, “O’ Sadir, stay at your home and be a rug of your house (as motionless and passive as a rug of your house).  Don’t move and remain absolutely silent so long the earth and the sky are silent (sinking of the earth has not occurred and the heavenly call/saiha has not been heard).  When you hear that Sufyani has risen, come to us, even if you have to walk.

Al-Kafi vol 5, pg 22
Hadeeth Number 2:

Says the Imam ‘alaihissalam, “Make pilgrimage to this House [the Ka’ba].  Does not each one of you like to be [safe] at his house, have his family prosper through his generosity, and wait for OUR RULE.  If he should live to see Our Rule, he will be like the ones who were with the Rasool of Allah salla Allahu ‘alaihi wa Aalihi wassalam at the battle of Badr.  If he should die, while waiting for Our Rule, he will be like the close companions of the Awaited One ‘alaihissalam who will be with him at his tent”…

Al-ibid pg 23, 
Hadeeth number 3:
Bashir al-Dahhan: I said to al-Imam as-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam,

I saw you in my dream and I said to you in my dream, Fighting under the banner of someone other than the Infallible Imam, appointed by Allah, is haram like eating rotten dead animal, drinking blood, and pork.  And you said in my dream, “It is indeed so”.
Al-Imam al-Sadiq alaihissalam replied [in wakefulness], “It is indeed so, it is indeed so”.

 

I can myself comment that some Hadith before Imam al-Sadiq about the Qaim refer to Imam al-Sadiq themselve as Shaykh Hamza Sodagar pointed out.

As for the rest of the Hadith's I contacted the office of Grand Ayatullah Nasr Makarem Shirazi (H) on the issue and received the following answer:

 

Answer:  We also believe that any uprising in the name of Imam Mahdi before His reappearance is condemned to failure and belongs to the Tyrant. But if an uprising is for the sake of Allah and in order to pave the ground for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS) and to implement the goals of Ahl-ul-Bayt (AS), then it is approved and is consistent with jurisprudential certainties and the rulings of Enjoining good and forbidding wrong. According to the certain documents "Islam without government," is a disfigured Islam which is free of content, and in fact is an Islam without Islam. Again, a group resist opposing the issue of Islamic government. The source of this opposition is, in fact, two things including mental aspect, and the aspect of narrations. The mental aspect is that, they have a bitter memory of the governments and they believe that in the current situation no one is able to form a divine government and implement Islamic justice. But in terms of narrative, they follow some narrations in this field which are not restricted to what you mentioned. The concept of narrations is that "every flag, which is set up as a government before the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS), is either a flag of delusions or condemned to failure." Pay attention to the interpretations of these traditions and they are as follows: 1. It means the uprisings which are carried out without the permission of infallible Imams (AS) or religious authorities or the general deputies of the Imams at the time of occultation. 2. It means the uprisings which are carried out to invite oneself and not to invite to the goals of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them), as mentioned in many narrations. The uprisings meant here is restricted to the ones that there was no preparation for such uprisings. So, the Imams (AS) talked in this way to prevent these premature or immature uprisings.  

 

Wishing you all the success               

Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi’s Office / Istifta’at section

 Allahuma Sali Ala Muhammad Wa Alee Muhammad.

[Munzir Ahmed 0]

15 hours ago, Yahya313 said:

Hadeeth number 483:

Omar ibn Handhala says, al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam said, “There are five signs before the rise of the Hujja ‘alaihissalam, the heavenly call, Sufyani, the sinking of the earth, the murder of the pure soul and Yamani.  I asked, may I be your ransom, If anyone from your House should make an uprise (khuruj: uprise or revolt to topple the government), should we make an uprise along with him?  He said, No.

If you are a Shi’a, then remember, it is prohibited until you hear the Saiha and that Yamani has appeared, to make an uprise.  That is unless the MI6 and CIA had paid Omar ibn Handhala to narrate this hadeeth.

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 264
Hadeeth number: 382
Our master Syed al-Sajjideen ‘alaihissalam said, “By Allah, no one makes an uprise from us before the Rise of the Awaited One, salamullahi ‘alaih, except that he will be like a nestling (baby bird), who flew off his nest before its wings grew, and kids pick him and play with him. 

15 hours ago, Yahya313 said:

Pay attention to the interpretations of these traditions and they are as follows: 1. It means the uprisings which are carried out without the permission of infallible Imams (AS) or religious authorities or the general deputies of the Imams at the time of occultation. 2. It means the uprisings which are carried out to invite oneself and not to invite to the goals of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them), as mentioned in many narrations. The uprisings meant here is restricted to the ones that there was no preparation for such uprisings. So, the Imams (AS) talked in this way to prevent these premature or immature uprisings.  

wa alaikumu salam

It means Zaid bin Ali Zainul Abidin did a grave mistake by uprising during the life of al-Imam al-Sadiq. And this practise was later followed by his children and cousins. And history shows that they carried out this without permission from infallibles/deputies plus they also did not invited people for sake of infallibles. Some of them became successful and others not.

[Munzir Ahmed 0]

Zayd bin Ali was unaware about who is the Imam in our family.

Zaid ibn ‘Ali summoned Muhammad al Ahwal and asked him: “I have heard that you are claiming that among the family of Muhammad, there is an Imam to whom obedience is obligatory.” 

Muhammad al Ahwal replied, “Yes, your father, ‘Ali ibn Hussain, was one of them.” 

Zaid said, “How can that be, when he would take a mouthful of food, and if it was hot, he would cool it with his hand and then put it in my mouth? Do you think that he would protect me from the heat of this mouthful and not protect me from the fire of hell (by not informing me of this)?” 

Al Ahwal answered, “He did not want to tell you lest you reject it and thus become a disbeliever, then he would not be able to intercede for you.”

Source: Rijal Kashi and Usul Kafi.

[Munzir Ahmed 0]

Zaid bin Ali also did not had a belief in taqqiyah.

Zayd b. 'Ali staged a rebellion against Umayyad due to a number of reasons: The tyrannies of Umayyad, invitations of people of Kufa, disagreement between Zayd b. 'Ali and 'Abd Allah b. Hasan on awqaf (inalienable religious endowment) of 'Ali b. Abi Talib (a) in Medina which led to judgment of Khalid b. 'Abd al-Malik and its consequences,^[1] the financial charges against Zayd b. 'Ali. Therefore, Zayd who did not believe in Taqiyya along with fifteen thousand people of Kufa who took an oath of allegiance to him rebelled against Umayyad.

(Taken from wikishia)

Zaid said to al-Baqir, "The Imam from us is not the one who would sit in his home, draw the curtain around him and lag from struggle (jihad). The Imam from us is the one who safeguards his dominion, fights for the cause of Allah a real fight, defends those who hold high regards for him and his rights."  

(Taken from Usul Kafi)

On other hand we have narrations on importance of taqqiyah.

The Shia have narrated in their books that the Prophet (sallalahu alaihi wa ala alihi wa sallam) said:

“He who leaves Taqiyya is like he who leaves Prayer.”

Source: Al Hidayah by Saduq p51, Man La Yahduruhu al faqih 2/127, Wasael al Shia 7/94-11/466

 

Point is that life of Zaid bin Ali was opposite to many fundamental beliefs of shia and also to what you have shared above.

[Waseem162 588]

@Munzir Ahmed Hazrat Zaid (a.s) was a Martyr and he did no wrong. He did not go against the Imam's rule. Imam did not passed an order to him rather advised him. He believed in the Immate of Imam (a.s) but because of his eagerness and belief to do whatever he can to uproot the evil he waged a war at Ummayaads.

When it was informed to Imam Sadiq (a.s) that his uncle Zaid (a.s) was martyred, he wept for a long time and exclaimed that Zaid(a.s) is a martyr and he died in order to uproot the oppression though the war was bound to perish as it was told by Imam (a.s) because the people were not committed to it and so it happened. But Hazrat Zaid's(a.s) situation was same as that of Hazrat Muslim (a.s) and Imam Hussain (a.s) and Hazrat Zaid(a.s) remembered Imam Hussain(a.s) and wept of his remembrance while getting slained at the hands of Ummayads.

[Sindbad05 2,045]

3 hours ago, Yahya313 said:

Salamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah.

Recently, a profile which I am sure everyone is aware of, that was defending YH and HA presented me with a set of Hadith against revolution before the Qaim:

 

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 310, 

Hadeeth number 483:

Omar ibn Handhala says, al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam said, “There are five signs before the rise of the Hujja ‘alaihissalam, the heavenly call, Sufyani, the sinking of the earth, the murder of the pure soul and Yamani.  I asked, may I be your ransom, If anyone from your House should make an uprise (khuruj: uprise or revolt to topple the government), should we make an uprise along with him?  He said, No.

If you are a Shi’a, then remember, it is prohibited until you hear the Saiha and that Yamani has appeared, to make an uprise.  That is unless the MI6 and CIA had paid Omar ibn Handhala to narrate this hadeeth.

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 264
Hadeeth number: 382
Our master Syed al-Sajjideen ‘alaihissalam said, “By Allah, no one makes an uprise from us before the Rise of the Awaited One, salamullahi ‘alaih, except that he will be like a nestling (baby bird), who flew off his nest before its wings grew, and kids pick him and play with him. 

Ibid # 383:
Says al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam, “O’ Sadir, stay at your home and be a rug of your house (as motionless and passive as a rug of your house).  Don’t move and remain absolutely silent so long the earth and the sky are silent (sinking of the earth has not occurred and the heavenly call/saiha has not been heard).  When you hear that Sufyani has risen, come to us, even if you have to walk.

Al-Kafi vol 5, pg 22
Hadeeth Number 2:

Says the Imam ‘alaihissalam, “Make pilgrimage to this House [the Ka’ba].  Does not each one of you like to be [safe] at his house, have his family prosper through his generosity, and wait for OUR RULE.  If he should live to see Our Rule, he will be like the ones who were with the Rasool of Allah salla Allahu ‘alaihi wa Aalihi wassalam at the battle of Badr.  If he should die, while waiting for Our Rule, he will be like the close companions of the Awaited One ‘alaihissalam who will be with him at his tent”…

Al-ibid pg 23, 
Hadeeth number 3:
Bashir al-Dahhan: I said to al-Imam as-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam,

I saw you in my dream and I said to you in my dream, Fighting under the banner of someone other than the Infallible Imam, appointed by Allah, is haram like eating rotten dead animal, drinking blood, and pork.  And you said in my dream, “It is indeed so”.
Al-Imam al-Sadiq alaihissalam replied [in wakefulness], “It is indeed so, it is indeed so”.

 

I can myself comment that some Hadith before Imam al-Sadiq about the Qaim refer to Imam al-Sadiq themselve as Shaykh Hamza Sodagar pointed out.

As for the rest of the Hadith's I contacted the office of Grand Ayatullah Nasr Makarem Shirazi (H) on the issue and received the following answer:

 

Answer:  We also believe that any uprising in the name of Imam Mahdi before His reappearance is condemned to failure and belongs to the Tyrant. But if an uprising is for the sake of Allah and in order to pave the ground for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS) and to implement the goals of Ahl-ul-Bayt (AS), then it is approved and is consistent with jurisprudential certainties and the rulings of Enjoining good and forbidding wrong. According to the certain documents "Islam without government," is a disfigured Islam which is free of content, and in fact is an Islam without Islam. Again, a group resist opposing the issue of Islamic government. The source of this opposition is, in fact, two things including mental aspect, and the aspect of narrations. The mental aspect is that, they have a bitter memory of the governments and they believe that in the current situation no one is able to form a divine government and implement Islamic justice. But in terms of narrative, they follow some narrations in this field which are not restricted to what you mentioned. The concept of narrations is that "every flag, which is set up as a government before the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS), is either a flag of delusions or condemned to failure." Pay attention to the interpretations of these traditions and they are as follows: 1. It means the uprisings which are carried out without the permission of infallible Imams (AS) or religious authorities or the general deputies of the Imams at the time of occultation. 2. It means the uprisings which are carried out to invite oneself and not to invite to the goals of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them), as mentioned in many narrations. The uprisings meant here is restricted to the ones that there was no preparation for such uprisings. So, the Imams (AS) talked in this way to prevent these premature or immature uprisings.  

 

Wishing you all the success               

Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi’s Office / Istifta’at section

 Allahuma Sali Ala Muhammad Wa Alee Muhammad.

There are two aspects of these hadiths, both say that any uprise that does not have Prophet PBUHHP and Ahlebait a.s are wrong. 

To begin with, there are two types of  Uprise, the Uprise that asks for the Sovereignty of Allah through the obedience of Ahlebait a.s even though Imam is absent physically but is watching as a vicegerent over the ruling nation, it is a divine uprise. It is, as it was during the time of Imam Ali a.s that when Imam Ali a.s was in Kufa, as ruler, the governors of Madain and Iran were under his allegiance and were responsible to him even though Imam Ali a.s was not always physically present in Madain and Iran or other provinces. 

Those who are opposing the uprise which calls for sovereignty of Allah AWJ and belief that Imam e Zaman a.s is watching over us are in fact, disbelievers in the presence of Imam e Zamana a.s as a leader, so how can those be believed ? The current Iranian Uprise and Uprise of the Muslims of India to have a separate state where they could live an Islamic life was according to the teachings of Islam. However, now it is the obligation of the rulers in those countries to consider themselves that they are being watched by Allah AWJ and Prophet PBUHHP and Imam e Zamana a.s and therefore they should make their lives according to their teachings, otherwise, they will be asked for it in hereafter.

Secondly, the uprise such as that Israel who believed that Palestine was always theirs while Prophet Moses a.s never have given such teachings to claim whole world to be theirs instead of saying that it belongs to Allah and begin killing people for the thing which you left thousands of years ago without any sympathy for children, is obviously against the norms of justice as the land which they occupied and wealth which they hoarded was not theirs. Such unjust reasons can lead other extremist groups to propound an ideology that since whole world is of Allah and Allah is of Muslims so we should rule whole world. Although Allah has clearly said that vicegerency of land is for pious ones who are justified but things can be interpreted wrong and such wrong interpretations may cause wrong uprises such as Israel did and ISIS did.

[Sindbad05 2,045]

If the land of Allah is governed by a ruler who is either present their to affirm that every principle is according to Islam or is affirming behind the veil, is a government based on divine law. 

[islam25 701]

3 hours ago, Yahya313 said:

Salamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullah.

Recently, a profile which I am sure everyone is aware of, that was defending YH and HA presented me with a set of Hadith against revolution before the Qaim:

 

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 310, 

Hadeeth number 483:

Omar ibn Handhala says, al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam said, “There are five signs before the rise of the Hujja ‘alaihissalam, the heavenly call, Sufyani, the sinking of the earth, the murder of the pure soul and Yamani.  I asked, may I be your ransom, If anyone from your House should make an uprise (khuruj: uprise or revolt to topple the government), should we make an uprise along with him?  He said, No.

If you are a Shi’a, then remember, it is prohibited until you hear the Saiha and that Yamani has appeared, to make an uprise.  That is unless the MI6 and CIA had paid Omar ibn Handhala to narrate this hadeeth.

Al-Kafi vol 8, pg 264
Hadeeth number: 382
Our master Syed al-Sajjideen ‘alaihissalam said, “By Allah, no one makes an uprise from us before the Rise of the Awaited One, salamullahi ‘alaih, except that he will be like a nestling (baby bird), who flew off his nest before its wings grew, and kids pick him and play with him. 

Ibid # 383:
Says al-Imam al-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam, “O’ Sadir, stay at your home and be a rug of your house (as motionless and passive as a rug of your house).  Don’t move and remain absolutely silent so long the earth and the sky are silent (sinking of the earth has not occurred and the heavenly call/saiha has not been heard).  When you hear that Sufyani has risen, come to us, even if you have to walk.

Al-Kafi vol 5, pg 22
Hadeeth Number 2:

Says the Imam ‘alaihissalam, “Make pilgrimage to this House [the Ka’ba].  Does not each one of you like to be [safe] at his house, have his family prosper through his generosity, and wait for OUR RULE.  If he should live to see Our Rule, he will be like the ones who were with the Rasool of Allah salla Allahu ‘alaihi wa Aalihi wassalam at the battle of Badr.  If he should die, while waiting for Our Rule, he will be like the close companions of the Awaited One ‘alaihissalam who will be with him at his tent”…

Al-ibid pg 23, 
Hadeeth number 3:
Bashir al-Dahhan: I said to al-Imam as-Sadiq ‘alaihissalam,

I saw you in my dream and I said to you in my dream, Fighting under the banner of someone other than the Infallible Imam, appointed by Allah, is haram like eating rotten dead animal, drinking blood, and pork.  And you said in my dream, “It is indeed so”.
Al-Imam al-Sadiq alaihissalam replied [in wakefulness], “It is indeed so, it is indeed so”.

 

I can myself comment that some Hadith before Imam al-Sadiq about the Qaim refer to Imam al-Sadiq themselve as Shaykh Hamza Sodagar pointed out.

As for the rest of the Hadith's I contacted the office of Grand Ayatullah Nasr Makarem Shirazi (H) on the issue and received the following answer:

 

Answer:  We also believe that any uprising in the name of Imam Mahdi before His reappearance is condemned to failure and belongs to the Tyrant. But if an uprising is for the sake of Allah and in order to pave the ground for the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS) and to implement the goals of Ahl-ul-Bayt (AS), then it is approved and is consistent with jurisprudential certainties and the rulings of Enjoining good and forbidding wrong. According to the certain documents "Islam without government," is a disfigured Islam which is free of content, and in fact is an Islam without Islam. Again, a group resist opposing the issue of Islamic government. The source of this opposition is, in fact, two things including mental aspect, and the aspect of narrations. The mental aspect is that, they have a bitter memory of the governments and they believe that in the current situation no one is able to form a divine government and implement Islamic justice. But in terms of narrative, they follow some narrations in this field which are not restricted to what you mentioned. The concept of narrations is that "every flag, which is set up as a government before the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AS), is either a flag of delusions or condemned to failure." Pay attention to the interpretations of these traditions and they are as follows: 1. It means the uprisings which are carried out without the permission of infallible Imams (AS) or religious authorities or the general deputies of the Imams at the time of occultation. 2. It means the uprisings which are carried out to invite oneself and not to invite to the goals of the infallible Imams (peace be upon them), as mentioned in many narrations. The uprisings meant here is restricted to the ones that there was no preparation for such uprisings. So, the Imams (AS) talked in this way to prevent these premature or immature uprisings.  

 

Wishing you all the success               

Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi’s Office / Istifta’at section

 Allahuma Sali Ala Muhammad Wa Alee Muhammad.

That is great. 

What we have to do fo uprising .is there something else to be done what we daily do. 

how what strategy is to do uprising. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by islam25

[Hassan- 3,567]

Great response. Shirazis expect us Muslims to sit in our homes and allow zionists/ISIS to take over our lands, lol.

Edited September 3, 2017 by Hassan-

[Yahya313 44]

To ahmed.

 

The opinion of our biggest scholars was different.

 

Al-Shaykh Al-Mufid called him a pious god fearing man in al-Irshad page 403.

Imam al-Baqir also said that no one resembled Ali Ibn Abi Talib more than he did. (bihar al-anwar)

Imam ridha said about him: he (Zayd bin Ali) was one of the scholars from the Household of Muhammad and got angry for the sake of the Honorable the Exalted God. He fought with the enemies of God until he got killed in His path. My father Musa ibn Ja'far narrated that he had heard his father Ja'far ibn Muhammad say, "May God bless my uncle Zayd...He consulted with me about his uprising and I told him, "O my uncle! Do this if you are pleased with being killed and your corpse being hung up from the gallows in the al-Konasa neighborhood." After Zayd left, As-Sadiq said, "Woe be to those who hear his call but do not help him!". (Uyun al-Akhbaar al-Ridha)

Imam Al-Sadiq said: From God we are and to Him is our return. I ask God for my reward in this calamity. He was a really good uncle. My uncle was a man for our world and for our Hereafter. I swear by God that my uncle is a martyr just like the martyrs who fought along with God’s Prophet (s) or Ali (s) or Al-Hassan (s) or Al-Hussein(s) (Uyun al-Akhbaar al-Ridha).

It is said of his brother Imam Muhammad al-Baqir wanted to test his brother on the Quranic knowledge, asking him various questions for which he received answers beyond his expectation, causing to him to remark, "For our father and mother’s life! You are one of a kind. God grace your mother who gave you birth, she gave birth to a replica of your forefathers!" (Al-Amaali pg.103)

[guest102317 1,495]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

السلام علیکم

@Yahya313

The problem with what you provide, both on the subject of qiyam and Zayd b. Ali رحمه الله is that it does not include all the evidence on the subject, or discussions of dalala, of tarajih, and of isnad.

For the thread to reach any sort of conclusion, these elements are necessary. Of course, just to appear to unaware laymen to have provided proof, what you've done is fine.

*

I am more interested in the quality of your argument than your conclusion.

و علیکم السلام

[Yahya313 44]

6 hours ago, Jebreil said:

The problem with what you provide, both on the subject of qiyam and Zayd b. Ali رحمه الله is that it does not include all the evidence on the subject, or discussions of dalala, of tarajih, and of isnad.

I am sure the office of Ayatullah Makarem went threw Tarajih, Dalalah and Isnad. It's just like when you give a Fatwa, they go threw all the procces. Same with this they looked at everything and compiled an answer. If you except me to start commenting on all od that then, you won't get anything since that's what Scholars do. 

Same goes with Zayd Ibn Ali. I quoted Shaykh al-Mufid and there is manjor 'Ijma among the scholars about Zayd (Rahimullah) being rightous and a martyr.

[guest102317 1,495]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

السلام علیکم

@Yahya313

 

But that's just an appeal to authority - an authority that your interlocutor doesn't accept.

Perhaps I mistook your thread. I thought you were trying to produce an argument for why your interlocutor is wrong in his conclusions on the basis of scriptural evidence.

*

But there is no ijma' on the legitimacy of Zayd's rebellion - which is the issue here. Majlisi II in Bihar mentions his rebellion as lacking in legitimacy, and of course there is Hadith showing that Zayd was explicitly denied the Imam's sanction for rebellion.

A righteous man may die in a righteous cause he ignorantly enters when he does not have the capacity for it. His rebellion would be in vain and so unwise and so not supported by the wisdom of the Infallible.

 

و علیکم السلام

[Yahya313 44]

21 hours ago, Jebreil said:

Majlisi II in Bihar

If you take al-Majlisi is a Hujjah then we have nothing to discuss. He did a great job with compiling Bihar al-Anwar but scholars like Allamah Tabatabai and Sayed Kamal al-Haydari pointed out, to the extent that Allamah Tabatabai complied a commentary of 6 Volumes about Bihar al-Anwar.

 

First hadith: It is narrated from Muhammad b. Ya'qub, from 'Ali b. Ibrahim, from his father, from Safwan b. Yahya, from 'Isa b. al-Qasim, who said: I heard Imam Sadiq say: 

Do not leave taqwa (fear of) God, the One and without any partners, and watch over yourselves constantly. I solemnly declare that if someone has chosen a shepherd to care for his sheep, but afterward finds someone else who is more wise than the first one for the task, he will leave the first one and employ the services of the wiser one. By God, if you had two life-times, and you experimented with the first one, and were left with the second lifetime, then there would be no difficulty in utilizing the experience of the first lifetime. But the reality is other than this. Every person has no more than one self, for which, if it falls into peril, there is no possibility for repentance or return. Therefore, it is necessary for you to carefully evaluate and select the best way for your selves. 

Hence, if one among us came to you and called upon you to revolt, think carefully and find out for what purpose he has revolted. Do not simply say [to justify his revolt by saying something like:] "Well, Zayd b. 'Ali also had arisen before!" The reason is that Zayd was a learned and truthful person and had not called upon you to acknowledge his own leadership; rather, he was calling towards a person who would be acceptable and endorsed by the ahl al-bayt. Had he succeeded, he would have acted upon his promise and would have handed over the power to its owner. Zayd revolted against the government so that he could overthrow it. But what is the one who has emerged today calling you? Is he calling you towards a person who is acceptable and endorsed by the ahl al-bayt? No, absolutely not. I am calling you to bear witness that we are not pleased with this person's revolt. This man has not even reached power and he has already started opposing us. And when he does seize power and raises his flag, he would certainly not submit to us in obedience. 

Hence, accept the call of the one about whom all the descendants of Fatima are in agreement. That person is your Imam and your leader. When the month of Rajab dawns, come to the help of God. There is no problem if you wish to delay it until the month of Sha'ban. And, it is even better for you, if you wished to keep the fast of Ramadan with your family. If you need any signs, it is sufficient to remind yourselves about the rise of Sufyani.[2] 

The hadith is regarded as authentic because the entire chain of transmission has been accredited by scholars.

[guest102317 1,495]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

السلام علیکم
 

@Yahya313

No, no scholar is hujja, but they do affect any claims to ijma`. I wanted to say there is no ijma` on the legitimacy of the rebellion.

There is an assumption that because Majlisi was not a philosopher and Sayyed Tabatabai was, that in the rational analysis of Hadith, Majlisi was weaker and the Sayyed's objections succeed. But I haven't read them in parallel, and of course Majlisi could not respond to any philosophical charges brought against him. But in any case, this is not a philosophical dispute, and there's no need to criticise Majlisi via Sayyed Tabatabai.

*

Please also post the original in Arabic.

The Imam is differentiating the legitimate caller to revolt from the illegitimate from then onwards, that is after Zayd's failed rebellion.

But the Hadith does not show that the Imam allowed Zayd's revolt and is consistent with the Hadith that show Zayd being discouraged.

It suggests that a sincere revolutionary (regardless of whether the Imam approves of his judgment or not) must hand over rule to its owner. That is what saves Zayd, despite his error. That is why Zayd wasn't a taghut, but a truthful revolutionary. Though he did not follow the Imam's guidance on the matter, yet he was not driven by unholy aims. 

But Zayd could be expected to hand over power to the Imam, for the Imam was present. For transferral of power can only be done if the owner of the affair is present. In his absence, the revolutionary leader is calling to his own rule - he himself will be head of state.

Further, it limits the legitimate caller to one from the Ahlulbayt who is agreed upon by all the descendants of Fatima - but this agreement must involve the opinion of al-Mahdi [a], whose opinion may not be second-guessed about any other descendant of Fatima during the Occultation.

Finally, it even places signs for the legitimate revolt - after the Sufyani.

It is very difficult to use this Hadith for your desideratum (as opposed to your interlocutor's), which is the legitimacy of revolution during the Occultation prior to the Sufyani by a leader who will have to rule himself if he succeeds, because the direction of the dalala is more apparently against such an inference.

 

و عليکم السلام

 

 

 

 

Edited September 4, 2017 by Jebreil

[Islamic Salvation 3,207]

The historical context behind these warnings should not be ignored. The `Aimma knew how strongly the tyrants had entrenched themselves in that time period and recognized that any revolt against them would only strengthen them further.   

Another important angle that some forget regarding Zayd is that he most likely knew that his revolt would fail and yet he decided to do it because of something he had observed first hand from Hisham [the Umayyad Caliph]. Sabb al-Nabi makes someone into a Kafir and the one who hears this should act upon it [according to the level of his Imam he has] and one who was pious like Zayd could not have ignored Amr bil Ma`ruf.

[3/175] الكافي: محمد بن يحيى، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن عبد الرحمن بن أبي هاشم، عن عنبسة بن بجاد العابد، عن جابر، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال: كنا عنده وذكروا سلطان بني أمية فقال أبو جعفر عليه السلام: لا يخرج على هشام أحد إلا قتله، قال: وذكر ملكه عشرين سنة، قال: فجزعنا، فقال: مالكم إذا أراد الله عز وجل أن يهلك سلطان قوم أمر الملك فأسرع بسير الفلك فقدر على ما يريد؟ قال: فقلنا لزيد عليه السلام هذه المقالة، فقال: إني شهدت هشاما ورسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله يسب عنده فلم ينكر ذلك ولم يغيره فوالله لو لم يكن إلا أنا وابني لخرجت عليه!

[3/175] al-Kafi: Muhammad b. Yahya from Muhammad b. al-Husayn from Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Hashim from Anbasa b. Bijad al-Abdi from Jabir from Abi Ja`far عليه السلام. He [Jabir] said: we were with him [the Imam] when the rulers of Bani Umayya were mentioned so Abu Ja`far عليه السلام said: no one will rebel against Hisham [the Umayyad Caliph] except that he [Hisham] will kill him, he also said: his [Hisham’s] rule will be for twenty years. He [Jabir] said: we were overcome with grief [on hearing that] so he said: what is with you - don’t you know that if Allah Mighty and Majestic wishes to destroy the ruler of a people he orders an angel so he [the angel] journeys swiftly through the celestial sphere and accomplishes what he intends? He [Jabir] said: we relayed these words to Zayd so he said: I witnessed the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وآله being abused in the presence of Hisham but he did not repudiate it nor did he put a stop to it - so by Allah if there is no one except myself and my son I would still rise up against him!    

8 hours ago, Jebreil said:

Please also post the original in Arabic.

Check [2/-] here: https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/zayd-b-ali

On 9/3/2017 at 2:09 PM, Munzir Ahmed said:

Zayd bin Ali was unaware about who is the Imam in our family.

This should also be factored into the study.

See [1/174] here: https://sites.google.com/site/mujamalahadith/vol1/book-of-narrators/zayd-b-ali

[guest102317 1,495]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

السلام علیکم

@Islamic Salvation

Thanks.

 

*

 

The problem with linking the issue of qiyam in general with the qiyam of Zayd is that the judgment of Zayd رحمه الله on how to act in a given circumstance is not a hujja on the Imamiyya and cannot be relied on in determining obligations and permissions, especially in matters of khuruj where the question of idhn (sanction) of the Imam is relevant.

Note that Imam al-Husayn علیه السلام witnessed sabb of Ali عليه الصلوة و السلام, which is equally sabb of Prophet صلى الله عليه و آله و سلم due to قُل لَّا أَسْأَلُکُمْ عَلَیْهِ أَجْرًا إِلَّا الْمَوَدَّةَ فِی الْقُرْبَی. But he did not rise. This was not his abandonment of nahy an il-munkar أشهد أنك... نهيت عن المنكر

Concluding the legitimacy of qiyam on the premise of Zayd is a weak argument.

But the strong argument is this: if the Imam discourages you from an act, do you still do it? It's like asking: if God عز و جل discourages you from an act, do you still do it? Legitimacy is ensured when there is no discouragement, mild or strong.

و علیکم السلام

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Jebreil

[Islamic Salvation 3,207]

Wa Alaykum Salam.

5 hours ago, Jebreil said:

The problem with linking the issue of qiyam in general with the qiyam of Zayd is that the judgment of Zayd رحمه الله on how to act in a given circumstance is not a hujja on the Imamiyya and cannot be relied on in determining obligations and permissions, especially in matters of khuruj where the question of idhn (sanction) of the Imam is relevant.

I do not think anyone is arguing that the act of Zayd was a Hujja but rather that his act was not seen as illegitimate by the Aimma [they had a charitable view of it].

al-Sadiq is said to have commented:

ولا تقولوا خرج زيد فإن زيدا كان عالما وكان صدوقا ولم يدعكم إلى نفسه إنما دعاكم إلى الرضا من آل محمد عليهم السلام ولو ظهر لوفى بما دعاكم إليه

Sabb itself is a different issue because we have narrations about how the listener can intervene when he hears it, which some might call 'vigilante justice'.

In any case I agree that the issue of Zayd cannot be used to argue for revolts now without a comprehensive study of all the relevant material.