Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Isaam

Was Imam Ja’afar as Sadiq Sunni or Shia?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Flying_Eagle said:

But now they are peaceful towards each other. So, why can't we be ? 

That's a big question. I don't have an answer. However, they are less religious. We don't want to be like them and ignore our religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Aragaia said:

That's a big question. I don't have an answer. However, they are less religious. We don't want to be like them and ignore our religion.

Nah, I have seen very religious among them, they debate and after debate is over, there is nothing among them. So, you say that they are indifferent and I accept it. And I say that it is better to be indifferent than to be hateful, at least it keeps peace in the society. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Flying_Eagle said:

Nah, I have seen very religious among them, they debate and after debate is over, there is nothing among them. So, you say that they are indifferent and I accept it. And I say that it is better to be indifferent than to be hateful, at least it keeps peace in the society. 

There are other options than indifferent and hateful. What is peace worth in a society if the people only worship themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Aragaia said:

Well just choosing a random word from the Qur'an doesn't mean you can use that word as you like - like by causing diversion among the Muslims.

I have chosen the verses of Qur'an describing the Ibrahim as with both the words Muslim & Shia  that you consider cannot be used simultaneously.  Do you not believe in the verses of Qur'an?

If the use  of these words simultaneously for a specific group is going to cause any division in ummah I do have right to ask that why both of these have been used for the Prophet ibrahmi ? instead of using one alone?

The above words just destroy your such thoughts.

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

If the use  of these words simultaneously for a specific group is going to cause any division in ummah I do have right to ask that why both of these have been used for the Prophet ibrahmi ?

 

Its because of the way it is used. To cause division.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Aragaia said:

Its because of the way it is used. To cause division.

I believe in the verses of Qur'an more than silly thoughts of like a school boy for just making baseless claims.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

I believe in the verses of Qur'an more than silly thoughts of like a school boy for just making baseless claims.

wasalam

"The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined on Noah - the which We have sent by inspiration to thee - and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should remain steadfast in religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them. Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him)." 42:13

You would have to draw it to Abraham, wouldn't you?

"And they became divided only after Knowledge reached them,- through selfish envy as between themselves. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord, (tending) to a Term appointed, the matter would have been settled between them: But truly those who have inherited the Book after them are in suspicious (disquieting) doubt concerning it." 42:14

Since Islam started from Abraham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Aragaia said:

Since Islam started from Abraham.

Very true. So are you denying the following verses?

مَا كَانَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ يَهُودِيًّا وَلَا نَصْرَانِيًّا وَلَـٰكِن كَانَ حَنِيفًا مُّسْلِمًا وَمَا كَانَ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ﴿٦٧ 

Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists. (3:67)

وَإِنَّ مِن شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿٨٣﴾

And most surely Ibrahim followed his way. (37:83)

سَلَامٌ عَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿١٠٩

Peace be on Ibrahim. (37:109)

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Muslim2010 said:

Very true. So are you denying the following verses??

مَا كَانَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ يَهُودِيًّا وَلَا نَصْرَانِيًّا وَلَـٰكِن كَانَ حَنِيفًا مُّسْلِمًا وَمَا كَانَ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ﴿٦٧ 

Ibrahim was not a Jew nor a Christian but he was (an) upright (man), a Muslim, and he was not one of the polytheists. (3:67)

وَإِنَّ مِن شِيعَتِهِ لَإِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿٨٣﴾

And most surely Ibrahim followed his way. (37:83)

سَلَامٌ عَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ﴿١٠٩

Peace be on Ibrahim. (37:109)

wasalam

We already went through this. Many times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aragaia said:

We already went through this. Many times.

Sure we have gone through it but I do not deny any verse of Qur'an being a Muslim and follower of the religion of Ibrahim AS for which Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) thyself instructed our Prophet Muhamamd saw,

wasalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Aragaia said:

I don't.

Because it causes diversion and because Allah called us Muslims and because forming sects is prohibited.

I understand a practical necessity in today's world but I have noticed a lot of people just calling themselves Shia

Salam you even don't call yourself a Muslim in your profile but complain about not using of just Muslim:hahaha:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2019 at 7:11 PM, Aragaia said:

"And they became divided only after Knowledge reached them,- through selfish envy as between themselves. Had it not been for a Word that went forth before from thy Lord, (tending) to a Term appointed, the matter would have been settled between them: But truly those who have inherited the Book after them are in suspicious (disquieting) doubt concerning it." 42:14

٤٢_١٤         وَمَا تَفَرَّقُوٓا۟ إِلَّا مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَهُمُ ٱلْعِلْمُ بَغْيًۢا بَيْنَهُمْ ۚ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةٌۭ سَبَقَتْ مِن رَّبِّكَ إِلَىٰٓ أَجَلٍۢ مُّسَمًّۭى لَّقُضِىَ بَيْنَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ أُورِثُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِنۢ بَعْدِهِمْ لَفِى شَكٍّۢ مِّنْهُ مُرِيبٍۢ 

042:014 They did not divide [into sects] except after the knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves; and were it not for a prior decree of your Lord [granting them reprieve] until a specified time, decision would have been made between them. Indeed those who were made heirs to the Book after them are in grave doubt concerning it.

This was knowledge sent to earlier nations. What knowledge has been sent to our nation / ummah?

The Qur'an mentions the knowledge that has been sent to us in following verses: 

ٱلْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكَ فَلَا تَكُن مِّنَ ٱلْمُمْتَرِينَ {٦٠}

003:060 This is the truth from your Lord, so do not be among the skeptics.

٣_٦١  فَمَنْ حَآجَّكَ فِيهِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَكَ مِنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا۟ نَدْعُ أَبْنَآءَنَا وَأَبْنَآءَكُمْ وَنِسَآءَنَا وَنِسَآءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَى ٱلْكَٰذِبِينَ

003:061 Should anyone argue with you concerning him, after the knowledge that has come to you, say, ‘Come! Let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, our souls and your souls, then let us pray earnestly, and call down Allah’s curse upon the liars.’

إِنَّ هَٰذَا لَهُوَ ٱلْقَصَصُ ٱلْحَقُّ ۚ وَمَا مِنْ إِلَٰهٍ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ ۚ وَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَهُوَ ٱلْعَزِيزُ ٱلْحَكِيمُ {٦٢}

003:062 This is indeed the true account, for sure. There is no God but Allah, and indeed Allah is the All-mighty, the All-wise.

فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا۟ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلِيمٌۢ بِٱلْمُفْسِدِينَ {٦٣}

003:063 But if they turn away, indeed Allah knows best the agents of corruption.

The above verses refer to the event of Mubahila that provided the evidence of glory of Islam against the Christians. This also provides the truthfulness of the Prophet saaw and his purified Ahl Albayt AS. This knowledge has been sent to us and kept in the Qur'an for believers and Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى)  sends  Lan’a upon the liars who reject faith in Ahl Albayt AS.

.٢٢_٥٤        وَلِيَعْلَمَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْعِلْمَ أَنَّهُ ٱلْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكَ فَيُؤْمِنُوا۟ بِهِۦ فَتُخْبِتَ لَهُۥ قُلُوبُهُمْ ۗ وَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَهَادِ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطٍۢ مُّسْتَقِيمٍۢ

022:054 [And also for the reason] that those who have been given knowledge may know that it is the truth from your Lord, and so they may have faith in it, and their hearts may be humbled before Him. Indeed Allah guides those who have faith to a straight path.

٣٤_٦  وَيَرَى ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْعِلْمَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ هُوَ ٱلْحَقَّ وَيَهْدِىٓ إِلَىٰ صِرَٰطِ ٱلْعَزِيزِ ٱلْحَمِيدِ

034:006 Those who have been given knowledge see that what has been sent down to you from your Lord is the truth and [that] it guides to the path of the All-mighty, the All-laudable.

a.   For our nation, the Qur'an mentions the knowledge that has sent to us in following: 

٣_٦١  فَمَنْ حَآجَّكَ فِيهِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَكَ مِنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ فَقُلْ تَعَالَوْا۟ نَدْعُ أَبْنَآءَنَا وَأَبْنَآءَكُمْ وَنِسَآءَنَا وَنِسَآءَكُمْ وَأَنفُسَنَا وَأَنفُسَكُمْ ثُمَّ نَبْتَهِلْ فَنَجْعَل لَّعْنَتَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَى ٱلْكَٰذِبِينَ

003:061 Should anyone argue with you concerning him, after the knowledge that has come to you, say, ‘Come! Let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, our souls and your souls, then let us pray earnestly, and call down Allah’s curse upon the liars.’

b. The Qur'an provides the verses for knowledge that has come to us: 

١٣_٣٧         وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَنزَلْنَٰهُ حُكْمًا عَرَبِيًّۭا ۚ وَلَئِنِ ٱتَّبَعْتَ أَهْوَآءَهُم بَعْدَمَا جَآءَكَ مِنَ ٱلْعِلْمِ مَا لَكَ مِنَ ٱللَّهِ مِن وَلِىٍّۢ وَلَا وَاقٍۢ

013:037 Thus We have sent it down as a dispensation in Arabic; and should you follow their desires after the knowledge that has come to you, you shall have against Allah neither any guardian nor defender

The people have been warned for not following their own desires by the above two verses. This is a crystal and solid proof of the truth of the Prophet saw saying to follow the Qur'an and Ahl albaayt AS.

We follow the Prophet and his Ahl albayat in the light of verses of Qur'an and hadith thaqlyn. (hadith of two weighty things ie Qur'an and ahl albayt).

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2019 at 5:48 AM, Aragaia said:

We already went through this. Many times

Salam

Abdur Rahman bin Auf, the king-maker, turned toward Ali, held his hand, and posed to him the following question:

“If we give you charge of the government of the Muslims, and put you in authority over their affairs, do you solemnly promise to act according to the Book of God, the Sunna of His Apostleand the precedents of Abu Bakr and Umar?”

(The proviso to act according to the precedents of Abu Bakr and Umar was not stipulated by Umar himself. It was the “move” which Amr bin Aas had suggested to Abdur Rahman bin Auf. He knew that Ali would not accept it.)

Ali replied to the king-maker as follows:

“I shall act according to the Book of God, and the Sunna of His Apostle. As for following the precedents of Abu Bakr and Umar, I have a judgment of my own, and I am going to use it.”

Ali knew just what would happen next.

The king-maker let his hand fall. He then turned to Uthman, and repeated the same question to him. Uthman immediately agreed. Thereupon the king-maker himself became the first to give him his pledge of loyalty. He congratulated him on becoming the new khalifa, and signaled the others to give him their pledge of loyalty.

The khalifa had been chosen. The new khalifa of the Muslims was Uthman bin Affan.

based on Imam Ali (عليه السلام) reply all Shia Imams follow Sunna of Prophet Muhmmad (pbu) that to this point all of them are Sunnis but in advance they have their judgment ,and they are going to use it that makes them Shia.

https://www.al-Islam.org/restatement-history-Islam-and-Muslims-Sayyid-Ali-ashgar-razwy/Uthman-third-khalifa-Muslims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He (عليه السلام) wasn't a Shia.

How can he (عليه السلام) be a Shia while he (عليه السلام) was an Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) himself and had ancestry from Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) as well.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2019 at 4:13 AM, Isaam said:

I was reading that Imam Ja’afar Sadiq (عليه السلام) was Related to Abu Bakr. I was reading on IslamQA (which is more of a wahabi website that calls themselves Sunni) that he didn’t approve of Shia’s and was a Sunni himself. Was he a Sunni or Shi’a? And if he was a Sunni did he disprove of Shi’a?

Imam Ja'far al Sadiq (عليه السلام) is related to Abu Bakr through his mother's side but that doesn't make him a Sunni. Obviously Sunnis will claim that he is. There's even  a narration that he said that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) was not pleased with Abu Bakr and Umar. Imam Jafar (عليه السلام) is from Shi3at Ali (عليه السلام)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Faruk said:

He (عليه السلام) wasn't a Shia.

How can he (عليه السلام) be a Shia while he (عليه السلام) was an Imam from the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) himself and had ancestry from Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) as well.

You're not making sense

youre saying that he can't be a Shia bc hes an Imam from the Ahlul Bayt? pls explain

and so what if he had ancestry from Abu Bakr that doesn't make him a Sunni. that's like saying if my ancestry goes back to christianity then im a Christian too

theres even a narration where he himself criticised both Abu Bakr and Umar if I can find the hadith later ill post it here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Imam Ja'far al Sadiq (عليه السلام) is related to Abu Bakr through his mother's side but that doesn't make him a Sunni. Obviously Sunnis will claim that he is. There's even  a narration that he said that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) was not pleased with Abu Bakr and Umar. Imam Jafar (عليه السلام) is from Shi3at Ali (عليه السلام)

How can one be a supporter of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) while he (عليه السلام) himself is part of the latter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

youre saying that he can't be a Shia bc hes an Imam from the Ahlul Bayt? pls explain

Please ..

 

8 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

nd so what if he had ancestry from Abu Bakr that doesn't make him a Sunni. that's like saying if my ancestry goes back to christianity then im a Christian too

I didn't claim Abu Bakr was a Sunni nor that Imam Jafar was. I confirmed that he was a descendant of him by mother's side.

 

8 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

theres even a narration where he himself criticised both Abu Bakr and Umar if I can find the hadith later ill post it here.

I do not deem hadith from both Sunni or Shia to be absolute and an authority unconditionally.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

and so what if he had ancestry from Abu Bakr that doesn't make him a Sunni. that's like saying if my ancestry goes back to christianity then im a Christian too

Not entirely true as ancestry is actually the argument and foundation of imamate.

Why should it be of importance when from fathers side and insignificant when it comes to mother's side?

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Faruk said:

Not entirely true as ancestry is actually the argument and foundation of imamate.

his imamate goes back to the Prophet and Imam Ali.  I don't know what are you trying to claim here, that Imam Ja'far (عليه السلام) was neither Sunnis nor Shia? Well he was indeed a follower of the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) 

 

24 minutes ago, Faruk said:

How can one be a supporter of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) while he (عليه السلام) himself is part of the latter?

as I said earlier ancestry doesn't necessarily have anything to do with religion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Faruk said:

Not entirely true as ancestry is actually the argument and foundation of imamate.

Why should it be of importance when from fathers aside and insignificant when it comes to mother's side?

also all children that remained after Abubakr both of them were Shia 

Lineage

Umm Farwa was the daughter of al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. Abi Bakr, Imam al-Baqir's (a) wife and mother of Imam al-Sadiq (a). Her father was al-Qasim who was trustworthy to Imam al-Sajjad (a) and his companion and was known as the faqih of the people of Hijaz.

The name of Imam al-Sadiq's (a) mother was Fatima or Qariba and her kunya was Umm Farwa or Umm al-Qasim. Her mother was Asma', daughter of 'Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Bakr. Since Umm Farwa reached Abu Bakr from both his mother's side and his father's side, Imam al-Sadiq (a) has been called a grandson of Abu Bakr by Sunnipeople. They narrate a hadith from Imam al-Sadiq (a) saying, "Fathered me Abu Bakr twice" in which he (a) has twice called himself a child of Abu Bakr. Shi'a regard this narration forged and even taking the standards of Sunni people, it is not reliable.

 

In Sunni sources

This narration has been narrated by al-Dhahabi without any reference and even with it has been mentioned in Tahdhib al-kamil with reference, in the chain of its transmitters, Hafs b. Ghiyath exists whose narrations have been considered unreliable. Ibn 'Asakir has also narrated this narration from a person called Isma'il b. Muhammad b. al-Fadl while al-Dhahabi says that when Ibn 'Asakir met Isma'il, he was very old and his memory was faulty. Besides, in the reference, Ibn 'Asakir has mentioned for this narration, Mu'adh b. al-Muthanna exists who is considered unjust by Ahmad b. Hanbal.

 

In Shi'a sources

Among Shi'a sources, the above-mentioned narration has only been mentioned in Kashf al-ghumma and al-Irbili has narrated it as a mursal narration (whose chain of transmitters is broken) because al-Hafiz 'Abd al-'Aziz al-Janabidhi has narrated it directly from Imam al-Sadiq (a) while he died in 611/1214-1215 and Imam al-Sadiq (a) was martyred in 148/765-766. Moreover, this narration has not been mentioned in any other Shi'a sources.

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Umm_Farwa_bt._al-Qasim

https://www.porseman.com/article/ابوبكر-جد-امام-صادق-(ع)--نسب-امام-صادق-(ع)--نسب-مادري-امام-صادق(ع)/11796

Edited by Ashvazdanghe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

his imamate goes back to the Prophet and Imam Ali. 

Imamate and Ahl al-Bayt are not exactly the same. 

Imamate is a concept. The Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) is a certain people.

Quote

I don't know what are you trying to claim here , t hat Imam Ja'far (عليه السلام) was neither Sunnis nor Shia?

That's not even the point. His person being a part of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) is the highest virtue and has nothing to do with any sect or creed.

Quote

Well he was indeed a follower of the Ahlul Bayt (علي ه  السلام )

 

So he (عليه السلام) followed himself?

Well, if that makes any sense ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

also all children that remained after Abubakr both of them were Shia 

Lineage

Umm Farwa was the daughter of al-Qasim b. Muhammad b. Abi Bakr, Imam al-Baqir's (a) wife and mother of Imam al-Sadiq (a). Her father was al-Qasim who was trustworthy to Imam al-Sajjad (a) and his companion and was known as the faqih of the people of Hijaz.

The name of Imam al-Sadiq's (a) mother was Fatima or Qariba and her kunya was Umm Farwa or Umm al-Qasim. Her mother was Asma', daughter of 'Abd al-Rahman b. Abi Bakr. Since Umm Farwa reached Abu Bakr from both his mother's side and his father's side, Imam al-Sadiq (a) has been called a grandson of Abu Bakr by Sunnipeople. They narrate a hadith from Imam al-Sadiq (a) saying, "Fathered me Abu Bakr twice" in which he (a) has twice called himself a child of Abu Bakr. Shi'a regard this narration forged and even taking the standards of Sunni people, it is not reliable.

 

In Sunni sources

This narration has been narrated by al-Dhahabi without any reference and even with it has been mentioned in Tahdhib al-kamil with reference, in the chain of its transmitters, Hafs b. Ghiyath exists whose narrations have been considered unreliable. Ibn 'Asakir has also narrated this narration from a person called Isma'il b. Muhammad b. al-Fadl while al-Dhahabi says that when Ibn 'Asakir met Isma'il, he was very old and his memory was faulty. Besides, in the reference, Ibn 'Asakir has mentioned for this narration, Mu'adh b. al-Muthanna exists who is considered unjust by Ahmad b. Hanbal.

 

In Shi'a sources

Among Shi'a sources, the above-mentioned narration has only been mentioned in Kashf al-ghumma and al-Irbili has narrated it as a mursal narration (whose chain of transmitters is broken) because al-Hafiz 'Abd al-'Aziz al-Janabidhi has narrated it directly from Imam al-Sadiq (a) while he died in 611/1214-1215 and Imam al-Sadiq (a) was martyred in 148/765-766. Moreover, this narration has not been mentioned in any other Shi'a sources.

http://en.wikishia.net/view/Umm_Farwa_bt._al-Qasim

https://www.porseman.com/article/ابوبكر-جد-امام-صادق-(ع)--نسب-امام-صادق-(ع)--نسب-مادري-امام-صادق(ع)/11796

A Shia in the sense that they supported the election of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and supported him (عليه السلام) against his opponents then yes.

A Shia in the sense that they reviled, cursed and rejected the leadership of Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) then no.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Faruk said:

A Shia in the sense that they supported the election of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) and supported him (عليه السلام) against his opponents then yes.

A Shia in the sense that they reviled, cursed and rejected the leadership of Abu Bakr (رضي الله عنه) then no.

A person who believes in Allah, the holy Prophet (sawas), his Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام), the Imamate is a Shia. The fact that you’re differentiating between two types of Shiism doesn’t make sense either because in Shia Islam we reject the caliphate of Abu Bakr and the other two caliphs, as well as every companion who betrayed the Prophet (sawas) and his family

 

2 hours ago, Faruk said:

Imamate and Ahl al-Bayt are not exactly the same. 

Imamate is a concept. The Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) is a certain people.

That's not even the point. His person being a part of the Ahl al-Bayt (عليه السلام) is the highest virtue and has nothing to do with any sect or creed.

 

So he (عليه السلام) followed himself?

Well, if that makes any sense ...

 

I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here. No he did not follow himself, when I said he is a follower of Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام), meaning he is a follower of the rasullulah’s (sawas) teachings and his household, the main role of the Imams(عليه السلام) is to continue preaching the Prophets(sawas) message and teach others about the importance of Ahlul Bayt. And yes all the Imams (عليه السلام) are part of Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام) , meaning they’re also infallible, but that doesn’t mean they follow themselves, like .?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

A person who believes in Allah, the holy Prophet (sawas), his Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام), the Imamate is a Shia. The fact that you’re differentiating between two types of Shiism doesn’t make sense either because in Shia Islam we reject the caliphate of Abu Bakr and the other two caliphs, as well as every companion who betrayed the Prophet (sawas) and his family

One could come to this conclusion by studying creeds only. 

However it is an historical fact that the term Shiatul Ali emerged from the First Fitna to distinguish the supporters of Imam Ali a s from those who supported the ones who opposed him (عليه السلام).

This term continued to be in use for those who followed Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) and those who resisted the Umayyad kings after the usurpation of Yazid and the martyrdom of Imam Hussayn (عليه السلام) and who attached to leadership from Ahl al-Bayt or co-operated with them.

The believe in imamate is not a condition of the abpve mentioned categories.

12 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

don’t even know what you’re trying to say here. No he did not follow himself, when I said he is a follower of Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام), meaning he is a follower of the rasullulah’s (sawas) teachings and his household, the main role of the Imams(عليه السلام) is to continue preaching the Prophets(sawas) message and teach others about the importance of Ahlul Bayt. And yes all the Imams (عليه السلام) are part of Ahlul Bayt(عليه السلام) , meaning they’re also infallible, but that doesn’t mean they follow themselves, like .?

It's a semantic issue. I understand you but it seems you can or will not understand me. No problem.

Peace and love be upon you and yours.

Edited by Faruk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Faruk said:

However it is an historical fact that the term Shiatul Ali emerged from the First Fitna to distinguish the supporters of Imam Ali a s from those who supported the ones who opposed him

The example of Prophet Abraham who was mentioned in Qur’an specifically as the Shi’a of Noah:

"And most surely Abraham was among the Shi’a of him (I.e., Noah)”(Qur’an 37:83)

Shia has been specially used for the "followers of Imam Ali((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم))". The first individual who used this term was the Messenger of Allah himself ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)&HP):

The Prophet of Allah ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)&HP) said to Imam Ali ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)): "Glad tiding O Ali! Verily you and your companions and your Shia (followers) will be in Paradise."

References:
Fadha'il al-Sahaba, by Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v2, p655 ,,,,,,,and others

Also Jabir Ibn Abdillah al-Ansari narrated that:
The Messenger of Allah ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)&HP) said: "The Shia of Ali are the real victorious in the day of resurrection/rising".

Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthoor, by al-Hafidh Jalaluddin al-Suyuti, who quotes the tradition as follows: "We were with the Holy Prophet when Ali came towards us. The Holy Prophet said: He and his Shia will acquire salvation on the day of judgment."

Thus the term Shia of Ali was used by the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) himself and not developed afterwards. It is agreed that use of this term  remained continued in the history of Islam.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Faruk said:

This term continued to be in use for those who followed Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) and those who resisted the Umayyad kings after the usurpation of Yazid and the martyrdom of Imam Hussayn (عليه السلام) and who attached to leadership from Ahl al-Bayt or co-operated with them.

it not true many people around Imam Hasan were from Khawarij that they were Quranists & didn't believe to Imamate that when Imam Hasan moved to fight with Muawiah (la) they betrayed him & injured him seriously before start of battle also in addition to Khawarij there were some people with him because they were just against Muawiah (la) that this group fooled with bribing of Muawiah & betrayed to Imam Hasan that some of them joined to Muawiah or left army of Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) right before start of battle also in Karbala people like as Zuhair ibn Qain (رضي الله عنه) were from Uthmanists (Shias of Uthman ) that was blaming all Imams for death of Uthman but about one day before Ashura his mindset after speaking with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) changed & people like Hurr (رضي الله عنه) were neutral to both sides until last minute also last two martyres of Karbal were from Khawarij that joined to Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) but were repeating Khawarij slogan until their martyrdom. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2019 at 5:24 PM, Faruk said:

This term continued to be in use for those who followed Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) and those who resisted the Umayyad kings after the usurpation of Yazid and the martyrdom of Imam Hussayn (عليه السلام) and who attached to leadership from Ahl al-Bayt or co-operated with them.

Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) the Prophets's grandson 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/22/2019 at 5:24 PM, Faruk said:

This term continued to be in use for those who followed Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) and those who resisted the Umayyad kings after the usurpation of Yazid and the martyrdom of Imam Hussayn (عليه السلام) and who attached to leadership from Ahl al-Bayt or co-operated with them.

Imam Hasan (عليه السلام) the Prophets's grandson 

Imam Jaafar Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/24/2019 at 1:01 AM, Isaam said:

Wow, I didn’t even realize this got to 5 pages. Or what’s going on...

You shouldn't be so surprised, this is the digital age after all. If we all got together face to face to discuss these topics there would be a few exchanges and then we'd be heading over to the complementary buffet and tea caddy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Imam Mahdi (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف) comes, will he give people a chance to be on the truth?

Will he debate people, be it Sunnis or Shias or Jews or Christians to show them the right path? Because now we can’t talk to him. So wouldn’t it be logical if he would show everyone the right Islam?

Ws/wrb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...