Jump to content
Follower of Ahlulbayt

Refuting "From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ashariyya"

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

On 9/22/2018 at 5:42 AM, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Does anyone know of any good works that refute the paper "From Imāmiyya to Ithnā-ashariyya" by Etan Kohlberg? 

You may also like to see the ؐhadiths about the names of 12 Imams. The following link provide this book about imams in Arabic:

http://alfeker.net/library.php?id=1069

wasalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2018 at 1:26 AM, skyweb1987 said:

I do not have this book, Could you please bring the points raised by the author so that it can be discussed and counter arguments / answer to the objections can be mentioned, please.

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

1. The statement that the doctrine of immamah  was developed by later in history can be refuted by the verses of quran that mention Ibrahim AS as chosen imam. The similar imams  were also chosen by Allah swt for the guidance of the people. Similarly in the ummah of the prophet saaw there are 12 imams/ caliphs/ ameers..

The doctrine of imamah as we now has its foundation in the hadith thaqlyn that two weighty things ie Quran and Ahl lbayt of the prophet saaw for whom we should adhere to avoid going astray. This is neglected by a common  and biased researcher from west at first,.

The numerous hadith in sunni books mention about 12 leaders/ successor / ammers but the names are not quoted because of political reasons. The sunni have remained confused as no one confirms the identification of those 12 based on the hadith of the prophet saaw.

Shia books do mention these hadith and the names are quoted confidently  from the progeny of the prophet saaw, First one being imam Ali and the last 12th is Almahdi AS. which is justified  in the light of the verses of quran and other hadith of the prophet saaw..

wasalm

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, skyweb1987 said:

1. The statement that the doctrine of immamah  was developed by later in history can be refuted by the verses of quran that mention Ibrahim AS as chosen imam. The similar imams  were also chosen by Allah swt for the guidance of the people. Similarly in the ummah of the prophet saaw there are 12 imams/ caliphs/ ameers..

 The doctrine of imamah as we now has its basis on the hadith thaqlyn that two weighty things for whom we should adhere to avoid going astray. This is neglected by a common  and biased researcher from west at first,.

 The numerous hadith in sunni books mention about 12 leaders/ successor / ammers but the names are not quoted because of political reasons. The sunni have remained confused as no one uits the cirteiaa for the idntifcation of those 12 based on the hadith of the prophet saaw. Shia books do mention these hadith and the names are quoted from the progeny of the prophet saaw, First one being imam Ali and the last 12th is Almahdi AS. which is justified  in the light of the verses of quran and other hadith of the prophet saaw..

 wasalm

The verse of Ibrahim being an Imam does not establish any of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) being Imams. None of their names are mentioned in the verse.

Yes maybe we could use the 12 khulafa hadith in Sunni books, but again this doesn't mention the names of the Imams of Ahlulbayt, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

The verse of Ibrahim being an Imam does not establish any of the Imams of Ahlulbayt (as) being Imams. None of their names are mentioned in the verse.

Yes maybe we could use the 12 khulafa hadith in Sunni books, but again this doesn't mention the names of the Imams of Ahlulbayt, 

1. Ibrahim AS was a chosen imam as per quran and his progeny includes imams too verse 2:124 except the wrong doers.

2. Why the sunni books does not mention these 12  names even in the presence of these hadith? Is it not a weakness of major nature in those when they claim to follow the caliphs / ameers / iams as ulil amr? Were these sunni books not written before shia early books?

Shia are well confident and justified for their names from the progeny of the prophet saaw based on the hadith of the prophet saaw and sayings of imams.

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

The books of Kulayni and Saduq all draw on resources that were written between the second and fourth Islamic centuries. The minor ghayba starts at 260 AH, so by then, most of the 300 Usul were already written. Kulayni just compiled them together and organized them into chapters.

Shaykh al-Tusi's Kitab al-Ghayba incorporates Fadl b. Shadhan's own Kitab al-Ghayba, and Fadl died just before Imam Hasan al-`Askari passed away. Fadl lived between the times of Imam ar-Rida to Imam al-`Askari.

Furthermore there were plenty of other sects that believed in ghayba: the Kaysaniyya (1st Islamic century) and the Waqifiyya (2nd century) for example. So the doctrine is much older than the 12th Imam. There is even some precedent for it in Sunnism (some believed that al-Khidr was in a type of occultation) and Judaism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Maybe u should refute Kohlberg brother Qaim?

Maybe I'll write an academic-style article someday, but I compiled a book on the subject here: https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235049457-qiyam-al-qaim-2017/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Qa'im said:

Maybe I'll write an academic-style article someday, but I compiled a book on the subject here: https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235049457-qiyam-al-qaim-2017/

Thanks amazing effort 

I'm lucky we have people like u here 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Follower of Ahlulbayt said:

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

Ridiculous argument.

Three points come to mind:

They're not our earliest books, most of the personal collections of the companions of the imams (the usool) predate them, they were gathered into larger collections such as Al-Kafi, so there was no need to copy and transmit them seperately thereafter, although some (AFAIK) have reached us in their original individual form.

Al-kulayni and his collection Al-Kafi came before Saduq and his books, and you'll see plenty of narrations from the later imams in there, so clearly he and his mashayikh believed in these imams to preserve and transmit these narrations.

Both books were written by twelvers. Basa'ir al-darajat was written by Muhammed bin Al-Hassan Al-Saffar who was a companion of Imam Al-Askari (as). How can one suggest twelver theology was later "developed" by saying there's a lack of evidence in a book written by a person who was a companion and believer of the 11th imam, clearly the author of the book believed in it already. As for Kitab Al-Mahasin, it was written by Ahmad Al-Barqi who was born 12 years before Imam Al-Hadi (as) and five years after Imam Al-Jawad (as), and was a companion of both, and he believed in the imamat of both.

So if one wants to suggest twelver shiism "developed" later you're going to have to do better than evidence that claim by pointing out books written by companions of and believers in the 9th, 10th, and 11th imams, while making false assumptions about them being our earliest works.

Edit:

Just realised the objection is about the ghaybah specifically, Qai'm's points are sufficient. It can be added however that there are several narrations about the ghaybah in Al-Kafi reported from the earlier imams (1), given that Al-Kafi is compiled from the usool which predate the two books mentioned, the claim is clearly false.

http://www.alseraj.net/maktaba/kotob/hadith/kafi1/html/ara/books/al-kafi-1/144.html

Edited by IbnMariam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

although I cannot claim to have even have the most superficial knowledge of the ghaybah period ,in general I have been disappointed by the paucity of ahadith in 12er imami hadith collections narrated from the first 3 imams and their companions , and the relative abundance of ahadith in sunni works narrated from close companions of first imam ( aka jabir, abu saeed, ibn abbas, bara b azib, zayd b arqam, abu dharr, and in later generations of tabi'in)

It almost seems from a neutral vantage point that two different Ali versions exist a Imami shia one and a sunni one and each has become a mouth piece of dogmas of their respective sects 

Can someone share any ideas on this ?

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2018 at 10:24 AM, Panzerwaffe said:

although I cannot claim to have even have the most superficial knowledge of the ghaybah period ,in general I have been disappointed by the paucity of ahadith in 12er imami hadith collections narrated from the first 3 Imams and their companions , and the relative abundance of ahadith in Sunni works narrated from close companions of first Imam ( aka jabir, Abu saeed, ibn Abbas, bara b azib, zayd b arqam, Abu dharr, and in later generations of tabi'in)

It almost seems from a neutral vantage point that two different Ali versions exist a Imami Shia one and a Sunni one and each has become a mouth piece of dogmas of their respective sects 

Can someone share any ideas on this ?

1. Hadith narrated by Imams area taken being they are the pious members of the Ahl albayat ie progeny of the Prophet Muhammad saww. there are hadith in our collections that the hadith of Imams are the hadith of the Prophet saww narrated by subsequent Imams. So we are quite satisfied with it in the light of hadith thaqlayn. 

2.  The abundance of hadith form close companions of Imams may have been there in Sunni wordks but there is a deficiency which is obvious in these work. eg the hadith does mention of 12 ameers/ caliphs or successors of the Prophet Muhamamd saaw but we could not find names of those 12 in Sahiheen books. On the other hand they are required to follow these caliphs as per interpretation of ulil amr, whose names are missing from their works. Also Sunni scholars are confused about these 12 names of the caliphs. But Shia have the clear define names of those 12 caliphs / Imams whom they follow.

3. The hadith are to be verified finally with the Qur'an if they are meeting the principles of Qur'an These  are acceptable otherwise rejected. if any Sunni hadith collection mentions about the permission of breast feeding in adult . then it is rejected as it is permissible only in age of infancy. (about 2 and half year as per Qur'an ).

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point 1..

 

so independent reports from first 3 Imams through their companions are rare compared to later Imams despite the political situation being much more favorable to ahlylbayt in times of first 3 Imams ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Point 1..

so independent reports from first 3 Imams through their companions are rare compared to later Imams despite the political situation being much more favorable to ahlylbayt in times of first 3 Imams ?

1. The question has already been replied in detail at sr no. 1,,2 & 3 above. The weaknesses in Sunni collections are identified and agreed.

2. How you are able to conclude such statement?

Would you please like to please mention how many hadith have been taken in Sunni Sahih book of Bukhari from Ahl albayt AS  of the Prophet Mugammad saww?

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm well aware of imami explanations on this issue but still makes less sense since well known companions of Ali and Hasan has narrated so many hadith in non Shia works.Didnt first 3 Imams spent most of the first 25 yrs after Prophet teaching their companions ? Surprisingly so few of them narrate in imami works then ? Or do they ? I'll be happy to be proven wrong I would love nothing else to find dozens of narrations from them 

Regarding Sunni works you know very well the anti rafidi and pro uthmani..bias of most Sunni muhdaith

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also if imami had a clear hadith from Prophet mentioning the names of 12 Imams why was there a dispute amongst the followers as to which Imam to follow after deaths of 4 to 5th Imams onwards ?

Was this hadith brought up as a counter argument during those times?

Like hadith of ammar,  hawab , and khawarij was used by partisans of Ali to refute the claims of his enemies ? And these hadith were well known during this time as documented in most Sunni and Shia historical works proving Ali and his partisans were on the right side 

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding point 1 do we have a specific book or document written by later Imams saying they heard hadith from earlier Imams? If not then these hadith of later Imam depend on the same isnad principle that Sunni hadith use I.e use of fallible narraters 

 

@skyweb1987 you counter argument is just that Sunni hadith is flawed , not perfect , not methodical and biased against progeny of Ali

I agree with you on all these points esp first two but I'm asking very specific questions just pertaining to imami Shia hadith 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2018 at 8:17 AM, Follower of Ahlul Bayt said:

Basically argues that the doctrine of Ghaybah was developed later in history and that in our earliest books (Basâ'ir al-darajât and Kitab al-Mahasin) this doctrine is absent. Only do we find in the later books of Saduq this doctrine really taking shape.

How do we refute the idea that Imamah was a doctrine developed later in history in general? 

You have two different issues here. Concept of Imamat and second is the doctrine of Ghaybah. 

Issue with these type of pointed and restrictive questions are that they are asked with the end in mind. 

Not every one  has the data available that people who study this type of discipline have. So, what do the Laypeople/average people do when they come across questions like this. 

Break it down to the most Basic Concept.

وَإِذْ قَالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً ۖ قَالُوا أَتَجْعَلُ فِيهَا مَنْ يُفْسِدُ فِيهَا وَيَسْفِكُ الدِّمَاءَ وَنَحْنُ نُسَبِّحُ بِحَمْدِكَ وَنُقَدِّسُ لَكَ ۖ قَالَ إِنِّي أَعْلَمُ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ {30}

[Pickthal 2:30] And when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the Earth, they said: Wilt thou place therein one who will do harm therein and will shed blood, while we, we hymn Thy praise and sanctify Thee? He said: Surely I know that which ye know not.

Allah(عزّ وجلّ) did not set a time limit. Meaning there will always a Representative of Allah(عزّ وجلّ) on this Earth. 

تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ مِنْ كُلِّ أَمْرٍ {4}

[Pickthal 97:4] The angels and the Spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees.

Unless, this has stopped- who is this person? 

*****

Look up a companion by the name of Owais Qarni/ Uwais al-Qarani. Concept of been present on this Earth but not having direct access was already establish for the people of insight. 

The fact that something in not in the Original books- is also a fallacy that many use- They do conveniently forget/or get selective here- That it is not that Shia had the government and all the printing presses were running at full capacity and that Shia Government was recording events and details in books to be read my the masses and preserved in history- . So, if something is not in the Earliest books, it means it is a new concept. Usually,  Non Shia get n to this trap, as they are used to this type of thinking. Everything is recorded for them, so if its not there is a innovation. 

With in 50 years Tragedy of Karbala, fact that Imam had to go into occultation means that conditions were still not in the favor- So, and intelligent mind after making these assessments will understand that history of the Oppressed is recorded in different manner. Our Theology was passed down in Dua's. Ziyarats and printed material in stages ( some of it was lost and burned)  - 

Its common sense to understand any underground movement will preserve many things - in verbal form - passed down to next generation this way. To print everything in open and ready for the masses to ready is not really intelligent - you are just providing reason to  the Government . When the time is right, less restriction form the Government but still public has been brainwashed for centuries  and it also depends on that condition so you slowly start publishing for the masses even at this stage some "very sensitive issues" still may not make it for various reason ....

Just an Layman input, may not be complete 

Edited by S.M.H.A.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Also if imami had a clear hadith from Prophet mentioning the names of 12 Imams why was there a dispute amongst the followers as to which Imam to follow after deaths of 4 to 5th Imams onwards ?

Was this hadith brought up as a counter argument during those times?

The answer comes from the verses of Qur'an and hadith as mentioned below:

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللَّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنْهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا ۖ وَقَالَ اللَّهُ إِنِّي مَعَكُمْ ۖ لَئِنْ أَقَمْتُمُ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَيْتُمُ الزَّكَاةَ وَآمَنتُم بِرُسُلِي وَعَزَّرْتُمُوهُمْ وَأَقْرَضْتُمُ اللَّهَ قَرْضًا حَسَنًا لَّأُكَفِّرَنَّ عَنكُمْ سَيِّئَاتِكُمْ وَلَأُدْخِلَنَّكُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ ۚ فَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ مِنكُمْ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ سَوَاءَ السَّبِيلِ

And certainly Allah made a covenant with the children of Israel, and We raised up among them twelve chieftains; and Allah said: Surely I am with you; if you keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and believe in My messengers and assist them and offer to Allah a goodly gift, I will most certainly cover your evil deeds, and I will most certainly cause you to enter into gardens beneath which rivers flow, but whoever disbelieves from among you after that, he indeed shall lose the right way. (5:12)

فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِم مِّيثَاقَهُمْ لَعَنَّاهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا قُلُوبَهُمْ قَاسِيَةً ۖ يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِ ۙ وَنَسُوا حَظًّا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُوا بِهِ ۚ وَلَا تَزَالُ تَطَّلِعُ عَلَىٰ خَائِنَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ ۖ فَاعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَاصْفَحْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُحْسِنِينَ

But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others). (5:13)

The above verses describe the scenario for the Jews and these are part of the Qur'an as reminder for us in similar manner.

إِنَّا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ كَمَا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ نُوحٍ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ مِن بَعْدِهِ ۚ وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَعِيسَىٰ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُونُسَ وَهَارُونَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ ۚ وَآتَيْنَا دَاوُودَ زَبُورًا

Surely We have revealed to you as We revealed to Nuh, and the Prophets after him, and We revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and Isa and Ayub and Yunus and Haroun and Sulaiman and We gave to Dawood (4:163)

The above verses imply that the revelations sent to other Prophets have been sent to our Prophet Muhammad saaww thus the presence of twelve leaders as representative of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is well proven, The evidence also comes from this verses that the number of names used in this verses are exactly 12.

The detail discussion about the twelver Shia as follower of the religion  of Ibrahim AS which is mentioned in Qur'an can be seen at the given links:

Also the hadith of the Prophet Muhmaad saww mentions that our nation will follow the ways of Jews and Christians. There will be 73 sects in our nation / ummah I do believe the sayings and words of the Prophet saww about this division.

The following ink may be seen further discussion about this hadith:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's all fine and dandy but you are just stressing importance of number 12 that's not the question.

If they were known by name why were there intra Shia schisms during their times ?

Ok let's assume Shias who followed other Imams were deviants

Then Did the right group of let's say as Sadiq's Shias  say we follow 12 Imams  vs zayd 's Shias who denied 12 is not right number or Ismail 's Shias who said 12 Imams are not right ?

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

 

Edited by Panzerwaffe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Panzerwaffe said:

That's all fine and dandy but you are just stressing importance of number 12 that's not the question.

If they were known by name why were there intra Shia schisms during their times ?

Ok let's assume Shias who followed other Imams were deviants

Then Did the right group of let's say as Sadiq's Shias  say we follow 12 Imams  vs zayd 's Shias who denied 12 is not right number or Ismail 's Shias who said 12 Imams are not right ?

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

 

Your last two points will get the convenient “hadiths were burned” opt-out.

I have always wondered how there could have been deviance in the house of the Imams'. Surely, if the imamate of 12 was conveyed by name from the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), this would have been common knowledge in the house of the Imams (عليه السلام). Hence, no dispute within the house of who is the next Imam. But this obviously was not the case as disputes did arise.

Edited by 786:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panzerwaffe said:

Also was there anyone during time of earlier Imams who said we will follow 12 Imams only ? Surely if it was a prediction hadith from Prophet and it must have been known in every generation, so regardless of their names the number 12 should have as much importance in time of Ali as in time of Imam Askari ?

Lastly how many of Ali partisans have narrated this hadith of 12 Imams ?

The same has already been explained and replied at sr no. 1 last posts. the link is given below:

As you have agreed about the deficiency in the Sunni hadith system just mentioning the numbers of 12 caliphs only without the names then it is an evidence that Bukhari had possibly kept out those 12 names from his collection for political reasons. 

Then what do you intend to bring like 3 caliphs thought who rejected the Qur'an presented by Imam  Ali AS according to the revelation order, you are just trying to present Sunni  myths when there are clear evidences from verses of Qur'an and hadith of the Prophet saww about 12 Imams from the progeny of the Prophet saww as presented in my last post and making you a speechless .

Then the question comes here why the three early caliphs put a prohibition for writing the hadith in their rule? @786:)

Why the Sunni thought just stick at 4 caliphs when their collections do have number 12 for them? 

wasalam

Edited by skyweb1987

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×