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

I am leaving Shiaism

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, Mahdavist said:

Actually they sometimes highlight the impact that deviations can have. While I dont think I will agree with the brothers conclusion of 'leaving Shiism' , there are probably going to be many contemporary issues in our communities which he has correctly identified and this will help us to save others from similar outcomes. 

In light of this... The following point is being ignored from OP's post. It's quite a common concern for leaving Shiism, but I don't know where it comes from, or what validity it has:

21 hours ago, UndercoverBrother said:

Very briefly and simply put, shiasm doesn’t agree with the Quranic narrative of Islam. As a theoretical religion in the books of Hadith yes maybe it has some value and khair but largely hadiths are ignored or denied as they don’t fit with ‘reason’ (a smart way of appropriating ahlul bayt to fit in with how you want them to be viewed). Also what you have today in shiasm is a post Safavid ritualistic set of customs and practices.

On 1/19/2017 at 3:20 PM, beardedbaker said:

He also touches on how mutazilite thought 'crept'  (it didn't really creep but was whole adopted) into the Shii rational school, another fascinating sociological development which requires further reading and debate.

On 4/21/2020 at 11:03 AM, eThErEaL said:

And by the way, this is a very important thing to understand. The Shiaism that has been influenced by Mutazili Rationalism lacks this profound understanding and is therefore discourteous to the Quran.  Only Shia Irfan, because it has benefitted from Sunni Irfan, steers away from the confines of Shia- Mutazili Influenced- Rationalism and Theology.

On 4/21/2020 at 5:15 PM, eThErEaL said:

Shia “theology” (I don’t mean Shiaism per se) is not influenced by the traditions of the Imams except in name or in a superficial way.  It (Shia theology) is primarily influenced by Mutazili Rationalism.

Maybe the more knowledgeable users can shed light on this issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The first question should be, what is “shianism”. Never heard of that before. There’s no such thing as being anonymous when you reject orthodox Islam as an alleged Hawza student, in “multiple countrie

I'm intrigued, please explain this further. I agree that the Imams were God centric but where will you go? You won't find God centrism in the Ismailis or the Sunnis.  The teachings of the Ahlul

There are no God centric, monotheistic and pure religions except Shi'ism. By far. People in disagreement might quote deviant practitioners or simply misunderstand which is not its fault rather entirel

  • Advanced Member
36 minutes ago, Guest Pschological warfare said:

Your conjectures are very convincing like this logic that people just bought without thinking it thru. 

 

 

I suggest you read Dr Liyakat Takim's article on that thread.

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
31 minutes ago, gharib570 said:

I suggest you read Dr Liyakat Takim's article on that thread.

We need to resist side conversation. My point was that your or OP's or ANY Internet Entity's Claim of Extensive Study or Howza Study or Expertise in certain field has no meaning to us laypeople. As we can see from the faulty Logic or lack of basic understanding which most laypeople have. 

Just as a side note for the readers. People complete MD( Medical Degree ) after bachelors(4 years) or Master (6years)  so you are looking a total of 9 - 10 years of study, So, after appox 9 or 10 years of Study you are called in Intern, meaning you are not allowed to many things , you complete your internship.  to be a surgeon requires much more time and certification and to be the best surgeon it will take you many more years of practice. So, don't tout 10-20 years of study in Islam as a You got to the top and all should listen to you.

AS a matter of fact, any Hawza student on the net, should not even be talking to laypeople. They need to consult their teachers or if they found something they should be debating if qualified with their teachers or peers. So, I really discount anyone claim of I have this degree or expertise. Imagine, an intern in Medical field starts challenging Medical advice on the internet. Will people listen? So, why here

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare

Now that OP has indicated his lack of interest after the initial charge. Its a non event. 

Many others have joined in and the theme is "People are leaving because of XYX "

This is not Maliki, Hanbali, Shafi or Hanafi thing, that well I am leaving this Jurist to follow another. 

Why would it matter to you as an Individual what others do? in the context that you will stop believing in the Wilayat? 

Can some of you who were very vocal here explain this basic fundamental inquiry? ( Kindly, with out going in to all the glory details and story telling about Tatbir or Matam or Anything related to Azadari, try to resist that urge)

Just the basic logical thought process, if someone else is doing XYX , You need to leave mentality needs logical, Intellectual and Rational explanation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@UndercoverBrother Mash Allah brother. Welcome to the path of seeking the Truth, Insha Allah.

I am glad more people are waking up and taking the Quran narrative seriously; The Criterion.

[17:81] And say: The truth has come and the falsehood has vanished; surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing).

All the best, iA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, gharib570 said:

I believe the Zaydi position is much closer to the "original Shia" point of view where the Imam should simply be the most virtuous. I believe this is what the original dispute was down to and Muhammad (s) indicated that 'Ali was of this calibre, however he was overthrown by Abu Bakr and Umar. Remember brother, Twelverism used to be in the minority before the Safavids, it was actually the Ismailis and Zaydis who were uprising against the Umayyads and Abbasids, although as things currently are you would think that Twelverism is the "orthodox" school..

1. How do you find that any one of twelve imams is not meeting this criteria  of being most virtuous? Would you please provide the evidence of your this claim?

2. What is the proof that 12vers were in minority before safvids?

3. Even if is supposed  to be that in minority then how does it mean that 12vers do not follow the right path or guidance in islam?

Would you please shed light on it with evidence, please?

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
4 hours ago, gharib570 said:

Ws bro, I feel you I have been studying Islam for the past 10 years and came to a similar conclusion -  it seems like the Twelvers felt like they needed to develop an alternative imamate/caliphate system to the Sunnis based on divine succession in the line of 'Ali/Husayn (عليه السلام) - sort of like a Biblical succession theory..

Shia 12vers do not have need to devise alternate system of any immamat except that has been mentioned in the verses of Quran for chosen representatives  by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in the form of caliphs/ imams / leaders chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). This is a misconception circulated by yourself as usual  at SC and it is a baseless statement. wasalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

l am reading along. As a Sunni,it is best for me not to comment on most things.

One reason is Shi'a hadith. Those l have read appear long-winded, {sometimes in the rare sense. convoluted}, and in my own mind occasionally cannot be at all truthfull (anyone wanting this explain may ask me). So it is too nuanced for me to follow sometimes.

My personal views aside, "leaving Shi'a" is not the same as leaving lsIam, or leaving Shi'ism entirely and moving into Zaida/Zayda(5er) ---{whose outlooks are more similar to my own rather than 12er}

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Muslim2010 said:

Shia 12vers do not have need to devise alternate system of any immamat except that has been mentioned in the verses of Quran for chosen representatives  by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in the form of caliphs/ imams / leaders chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). This is a misconception circulated by yourself as usual  at SC and it is a baseless statement. wasalam

There are no verses that state imamah as you perceive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

l am reading along. As a Sunni,it is best for me not to comment on most things.

One reason is Shi'a hadith. Those l have read appear long-winded, {sometimes in the rare sense. convoluted}, and in my own mind occasionally cannot be at all truthfull (anyone wanting this explain may ask me). So it is too nuanced for me to follow sometimes.

My personal views aside, "leaving Shi'a" is not the same as leaving lsIam, or leaving Shi'ism entirely and moving into Zaida/Zayda(5er) ---{whose outlooks are more similar to my own rather than 12er}

how exactly do you practice Islam, for example washing for wudhu and praying? Do you still follow thw 12er way or the zaydi way? Zaydi Islam is like Shia Islam with Hanafi fiqh right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Life2020 said:

how exactly do you practice Islam, for example washing for wudhu and praying? Do you still follow thw 12er way or the zaydi way? Zaydi Islam is like Shia Islam with Hanafi fiqh right?

?
Brother @hasanhh has always been a Sunni Muslim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, 786:) said:

What is the true message according to you? Muhammad’s family is superior to all mankind?

The true message is oneness of God. Everything else is an ancillary. Not the other way around. Most Shias tend to spend night and day talking about wilayah of Ahlulbayt and forget this is only a supplementary portion of deen. This is my understanding of Imam centric. If you open the Quran it is a sea of Tawheed. The Shia mimbars do not echo the Quran.

Salam in Holy Quran clearly said that Allah made certain families & people  superior to others that family of prophet Muhammad (pbu) certainly is one of them from prophet Ishmael (عليه السلام) that based on oath of Allah on Quran only just persons from them will be Imams that only 12 Imams of Shia Islam have this condition in other hand Shaitan (la) was first God centrist that just worshiped Allah & refused to do Sujood to prophet Adam (عليه السلام) because he was God centrist not Adam (Imam) centrist anyway don't waste your time on me because it's a Safavid propaganda of Majlisi :D

14 hours ago, Guest OnPoint said:

Mohammad (s) was neither Shiite or Sunni or Muslim.  Titles are titles and Shiism like Sunnism is undefined. It means something at the same time almost nothing.

That said 42:23 and 25:57 confirm Ahlulbayt are the means and path to God.  It means Mohammad (s) didn't seek a reward in reality for his efforts but what people see and accuse of seeking if he was a fake Prophet would be authority, fame, reverence, moral landscaping, control, legacy, and monarchy, but God said this is the path that God establishes to himself so that which they see would be reward it's upon God to establish and really upon no one but him to do it.

Salam prophet Muhammad was follower of way of prophet Musa (عليه السلام) that holy Quran calls followers of prophet Musa (عليه السلام) as Shia of him & both prophets were followers of way prophet Ibrahim (عليه السلام) that he introduces as Shia of prophet Noah (عليه السلام) that according to Quran so prophet Muhammad (pbu) was Shia of all prophets that way (even you call it Suunah) & religion of all of them was Islam but until now I don't find anything about Sunni term for them in Quran .

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

in my first line:

3 hours ago, hasanhh said:

l am reading along. As a Sunni,it is best for me not to comment . . .

but you asked:

3 hours ago, Life2020 said:

how exactly do you practice Islam, for example washing for wudhu and praying? Do you still follow thw 12er way or the zaydi way? Zaydi Islam is like Shia Islam with Hanafi fiqh right?

Now, a fill-in-the-blank-test:

"As a _____, it is best for me . . ."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Muslim2010 said:

1. How do you find that any one of twelve imams is not meeting this criteria  of being most virtuous? Would you please provide the evidence of your this claim?

2. What is the proof that 12vers were in minority before safvids?

3. Even if is supposed  to be that in minority then how does it mean that 12vers do not follow the right path or guidance in islam?

Would you please shed light on it with evidence, please?

1.) Clearly committing a great sin or having a deficiency in knowledge would take away that criteria. The criteria is obedience to the Quran and Sunnah of whom Imam Ali (عليه السلام) fit that criteria after the prophet (sa) although he was overthrown by you know who.

4:59 O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.

Notice the obedience to those charged in authority is conditional upon them obeying the Quran and Sunnah. This is why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) rejected the caliphate after Umar based on the practices of the 2 caliphs right? In addition to this it is a rational fact that a leader much be virtuous otherwise a community will eventually be driven to failure. Twelver Shia scholars would tell us that we are absolutely incapable of making this choice ourselves so we need someone to tell us. Of course, while the Imam is in occultation they effectively do that job anyway so they eventually succumb to follow a fallible imam..

2.) Twelverism as it is known today came about around the minor/start of the major occultation - this is when all the great books were written which we have today. Before that, the Shia always disputed about who was the next imam - unless we want to ignorantly deny history and simply just call all those people and the other imams misguided. Take for example Jafar al-Sadiq's (عليه السلام) death, after Imam Jafar died, the Shia went to his eldest son Abdullah, then eventually went to Musa when Abdullah passed away.. Still, others followed the sons of Ismail (عليه السلام) who went on to found the largest Shia dynasty ever.

The concept of bada was then invented to explain all of this away and hadiths that say Ismail was an alcoholic. My point is that, if there was a clear designation of 12 imams by our beloved prophet (s), then why did Allah need to make a change (bada) and why such confusion after each imam? This is just one example and so many splits occured after each imam. Of course, our Twelver scholars would tell us everyone was misguided.. . But many of the "misguided folk" launched uprisings like the Ismailis and Zaydis, and put pressure on the Abbasids, obviously before that we had 'Ali, Hasan and Husayn (may Allah be pleased with them) who we can all agree, no matter how many imams we believe in, that they put pressure on the Umayyads.. It is obvious that a major disagreement amongst the Shia for imamate was whether the imam should lead an uprising, which the Twelvers believe this will be Imam al-Mahdi's role and any other uprising is doomed to failure before that.

3.) Through my own research there is a lack of credible mutawatir twelver narrations that narrate all of the imams in order - and speculation is no substitution for certainty.

In fact, you find most books start with the famous Jabir b. Samura tradition which is found in the Sunni collections (possibly a rebuttal to the embarassing twelve hypocrites narrations, which narrate there will be 12 hypocrites amongst the companions). Other than that, you find traditions narrated about the tablet (lawh) of Fatimah (sa), or the scroll of Imam 'Ali (عليه السلام) (Kitab Ali). For example, Abu Khalid al-Kabuli narrates one of the tablet traditions and said al-Baqir is in the Torah. This is totally wrong, the imams are not mentioned in the Torah! Most of the narrations are very long (too long to fit on a tablet or green emerald) and often miraciously mention each Imam's name, how there will be a certain dispute after each one, and how Jafar al-Kadhab will come to lie and deceive.

Doesn't it all seem a bit too ideal? It reminds me of the hadiths of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) apparently saying "The best after me are Abu Bakr and Umar" in the Sunni collections! They are obviously concocted with a political agenda for $$$!

How about 'Ali's (عليه السلام) sons being named Shabbayr, Shubbayr (Hebrew names nothing like Aaron's (as)'s son's names) ? All these hadiths tell us that the early Shia scholars were struggling with the idea of imamate and trying to piece it together - they eventually decided on twelve imams and that the last one was in occultation when they struggled to rationally explain why the twelve imam hadn't made a public appearance.

It would seem that all of these narrations have been projected back into the mouths of the imams (عليه السلام), because if it was that clear, and the imams actually said these things, then there would not have been as much dispute on the number of the imams, and you would of found Shia narrating these traditions at the time as proofs. This is no different than the Sunni hadiths were written post-khilfa-rashidun and Umayyad dynasty in order to create a certain image of the companions and history. It has all been concocted and projected back to the prophet (s) and his companions mouths in order to create legitimacy for the Umayyad and Abbasid rulers. How can we be so naive to only think the Sunnis would fall prey to this but not us? Hadith is and always will be big business for the scholars on the pulpits from one generation to the next. I am not against ahadith as they are a great resource for the Sunnah and there are many fantastic pious scholars, If you still not believe me you can research the scholar al-Behbudi who was an Usuli scholar who came to the conclusion that most of the Twelver narrations came about after the confusion (hayra). Whether he belived in twelve imams or not I am not sure it would be interesting to find out if you know?

All I am saying is that you cannot study hadiths and ignore the socio-political context which was taking place. If you read the Islamic history books, you will constantly find the phrase "Imam of Guidance" (Imam al-Hadi/Mahdi) and "Imam of Misguidance" (Imam al-Dhalla) (it is very rare to find mention of 12 imams in the historical works) - this appears to be the original criteria and Uthman's assasination centered around this very issue, with some Muslims alleging he was the former and some the latter. This is just one example below which took place during the battle of Karbala:

According to Abu Mikhnaf-Yusuf b. Yazid- 'Afif b. Zuhayr b. Abi al-Akhnas, who witnessed the killing of al-Husayn: Yazid b. Ma'gi of the Bann 'Amirah b. Rabi'ah, an ally of the Banu Salimah of 'Abd al-Qays, came forward and called out,

"Burayr b. Hudayr, how do you think God has treated you?" Burayr replied, "By God! God has treated me well and treated you badly." He answered, "You are a liar. Even before today you were always a liar. Do you remember when I used to go with you among the Band Lawdhin? Then you used to say that Uthmin b. A ffin was a man who indulged himself excessively, that Mu`awiyah b. Abi Sufyin was one who was in error and who caused people to go astray, and that the imam of guidance and truth was Ali b. Abi Talib." Burayr retorted, "I testify that this is my opinion and belief." Yazid b. Ma`gil replied, " And I testify that you are one of those who are in error." . (History of al-Tabari, Caliphate of Yazid b. Mu'awiyah, Pg 132-133)

Look at the discussion of Burayr (shahid of Karbala) - there is no mention of 12 imams or divine right, as you can clearly see the dispute was all over who was deemed an Imam of Guidance or Imam of Misguidance. The Bani Hashim and their Shia deemed that an Imam of Guidance must strictly adhere to the Quran and Sunnah, but the Uthmaniyyah were more concerned with power and booty, to them religion was a secondary issue. Read the history books, you will always find these phrases repeating themselves - Imam of Guidance and Imam of Misguidance!

This confusion on imamate is all due to that original "mistake" by the companions who overthrew Imam Ali (عليه السلام) by force, if it wasn't for that mistake, we would of had a clear picture on Islamic leadership. In fact based on that precedent some groups still believe that by force they can establish imamate. Abu Bakr (with the help of Umar, Abu Ubdaydah and Salim) installed himself as a caliph and they passed the caliphate amongst themselves until it came into the hand of the Umayyads, and we know the rest :(

One group settled for imams like Uthman, Mu'awiyah and Yazid, whilst another later developed a concept based on divine succession where they would not settle for anything less than an infallible imam in the line of Husayn ibn Ali (عليه السلام), even if he was invisible and practically speaking absent so much that a falible ruler has to be elected to be his representative.. In truth, the criteria for imamate is none other than adherence to the Quran and Sunnah - that is the obedience verse which I posted at the very start... Allahu alam. I hope this can be a stimulating discussion inshallah. I am Shia by the way I am just trying to find the truth like all of us!

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Considering Leaving Shia

Salam guys, Im on the same Boat as OP and Brother Hassan.

I became a Shi’a from Sunni Islam as I believed in the passage of succession to Imam al-Ali. I saw mutawahir hadeeths of Ghadir Khums and K started believing I was misled my whole life.

However recently I’ve been questioning a few things about Shi’a Islam that have been bought to my attention and I’m going to revert back to Sunni Islam unless people can help my answer otherwise.

 

1) Cultural Shia Islam from the popular Shi’a countries

In Iran. There are popular Shia televangelists who state, "God created 14 gods entirely equal to Himself.(I heard someone say Khomeini also had this view but I’m unsure). Imam Hussain is as if Allah grew a body and came to earth. Do not distinguish 'knowledge of Allah' because what Allah knows is what Imam Hussain knows" etc. In the subcontinent the shirk is different, like people prostrating to Zuljana. 

My gripe is this, this weirdness exists in the Sunni world as well. However, there are scholars from all backgrounds warning against this behavior. Shias have an organized clergy, the fatwa of one grand marja can stop this. It upsets me that Shias care more about Abu Bakr and Umar instead of condemning influencers who state "Imam Ali is God, I am an Ali worshipper."


2)A lot of Shi’i scholars believe in Tahrif of the Qur’an. For example:

Fasl al-khitab is a book by a Shia scholar, it tried to prove that the Quran is incomplete and corrupted. Agha Buzurg Tehrani (d. 1970) wrote a book defending the position
 

al-Mizan states:

 

The problem is, the Imamis enjoyed almost 350 years of divine connection. To me it is problematic that haq was found through engagement with Mutazilis and receiving governmental support (at this point, the Shias were in power and wanted a "respectable sect.")
 

"Thus, if it supposed that something from the Quran was removed, or the 'irab, diacritics, and/or arrangement of verses suffered alteration, then it must be accepted that the alteration was in a manner which resulted in miniscule consequenses in its attributes of miraculousness, holiness, etc.
Thus, if an alteration in the Quran were to be found, it would be in the form of the deletion of a repeated verse, ikhtilaf of a dot, 'irab, and diacritic."
 

"The verses of the Quran were not successfully arranged, the Sahaba interfered in it."
"The Quranic verses were revealed scatteredly, hence, the verses are aligned into the arrangement found in the modern Qurans. Undoubtedly the Companions participated in the process. Clearly, from the hadiths reporting the compilation of the Quran, it is obvious that when aligning the verses the Companions were guided by personal ijtihad, opinion, and style."
 

Considering how popular this tafsir is. The 4 earliest Shia tafsirs all affirm tahrif, I thought this belief died out but I guess not.

 

3) Infallibility of the Imams.

 

I was speaking to someone about this and they told me why its so hard to believe? I told them that something like this God would not leave out of the Qur’an. The ayat about the covenant does not refer to the Imams and it doesnt prove infallibility.

The head of the Qummi hawza Ibn Junayd Iskafi denied infallibility of the Imams. Ismat is a concept that evolved within Shi'ism.
http://en.mobile.wikishia.net/index.php/Ibn_al-Junayd_al-Iskafi


4) Possible farbicated hadeeths:

the Kufan Shias May fabricated upon their Imams. The early Imamis didn't believe in 12 imams, this hadith was "read in" when Imam Askari didn't have a visible child. The Imams were in Madina, their major Medinan Shias were not extreme in belief 

Yet the companions who lived in Kufa somehow narrated 70,000 hadiths from the Imam

 

 

 


if someone can put these doubts away I would be more then happy to be a Shi’a. 

I read Inquiries About Shia Islam by Qazwini (I believe that's the title), I looked up every source and I was disappointed. 

Someone mentioned how Then I was Guided by Tijani made him leave Shi'ism because now we have the internet and can search up the sources

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The issue clearly was the quality of the imam, how guided he was, and not on the quantity of imams. The matches up with what is historically recorded and how Muslims fought each other because they deemed the imam unfit to rule. This idea of 4 righteous caliphs or 12 imams came later and was projected back via the hadith, which is why there is no trace of it in the historical works.

In summary the Shia Zaydi Jarudiyyah position or Sunni Tafdhili/Tafzili seem closer to what original Shiism would of been like. The tafdhili became confused on the Abu Bakr and Umar issue and ended up regarding them as righteous, despite them clearly forcing Imam 'Ali (عليه السلام) to pledge allegience by historical accounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, gharib570 said:

Notice the obedience to those charged in authority is conditional upon them obeying the Quran and Sunnah. This is why Imam Ali (عليه السلام) rejected the caliphate after Umar based on the practices of the 2 caliphs right? 

1. Disagreed as the caliphs chosen by people does not exist in quran. If you think otherwise then please quote  the verse of Quran mentioning  the name of caliph chosen by the people for their guidance. Ulil Amr is not chosen by the people but Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) mentions its name through the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, gharib570 said:

The criteria is obedience to the Quran and Sunnah of whom Imam Ali (عليه السلام) fit that criteria after the prophet (sa) although he was overthrown by you know who.

It is not the matter that people will see who is going to fit on that criteria. In fact Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) & His Apostle (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) have never left this matter on the choice of people.

Hadith e Ghadeer, hadith e mazilah, hadith e safinah are the proof and many other ahadith can be cited as evidence in which Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) have introduced the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) as the bearer of his "minniyat" (innahum minni wa ana minhum).

2 hours ago, gharib570 said:

If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger

How can you or anyone differ from the one whose obedience is made obligatory by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in this verse? 

Why the command of obedience is given if you have the right to differ (which means disobedience)?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, gharib570 said:

1.) Clearly committing a great sin or having a deficiency in knowledge would take away that criteria. The criteria is obedience to the Quran and Sunnah of whom Imam Ali (عليه السلام) fit that criteria after the prophet (sa) although he was overthrown by you know who.

4:59 O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.

First you have failed to provide any evidence that the 12 imams does not meet the criteria of being most virtuous and most knowledgeable. If Imam Ali, Imam Hassan, Imam Hussain, and Imam Ali Ali bin Hussain (عليه السلام) are most virtuous (as zaidi and twelvers both believe) then no one lesser than them in virtues can be an imam.  The rest is an effort to twist the words from your side.  Obeying the Ulil Amr is not separated in the verse with  the prophet so no fallible is covered under this verse of Ulil Amr. Just for your clarification scholars are not our imams, Imams are from the purified progeny of  the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) so please make it clear in your mind before making any  false claims.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, gharib570 said:

3.) Through my own research there is a lack of credible mutawatir twelver narrations that narrate all of the imams in order - and speculation is no substitution for certainty.

I have mentioned my clear view that the hadith about 12 imams are inline with the verses of quran so I rejected such efforts whether in sunni or other books to create doubt about the names and the count of 12 imams.

I still await the proof for your claim that 12vers were in minority before safvids.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
6 minutes ago, gharib570 said:

So where is the twelfth imam?

12th Imam is in my heart, in my eyes in my thoughts always as mentioned by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as Baqiytullah fil Arz. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has not permitted my eyes so far to see his (عليه السلام) light by my open eyes. 

I await the answer to my last three posts please. wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Okay brother as you wish I admire your belief nonetheless. If you can point me to some solid proofs I would be interested to see.

1.) The Ismaili movement was on the horizon around the time of Ja'far as-Sadiq's (عليه السلام) death and within 100 years they have founded the largest Shia dynasty ever. Meanwhile, the Twelvers were still struggling after each imam who to pick - the book Firaq as-Shia by Nawbakhti is proof of this as it lists all the disagreements and Shia sects which was always about the number of imams. They eventually decided on twelve imams and the idea of occultation when the Twelfth one never appeared to the masses. I do acknowledge that occultation had been around before, which was used for the wakeels as an excuse to claim the khumms money (waqifah).

The only way to believe that Twelvers had a consistent belief in Twelve imams before the Zaydis and Ismailis is to believe their hadith - which is exactly my point.

2.) As for Imam Mahdi - it simply means a guided imam who guides to the Quran and Sunnah when we look at historical sources. Only after Husayn ibn 'Ali (as)'s passing did this become an extreme doctrine which became enshrined in the ahadith - of an imam who would return from the dead and slay all the enemies of the ahl al-Bayt. As I have pointed out, you can only reach this belief through the hadith - the history books testify that it was simply a guided leader. This was later exploited by the ruling elite like the Abbasids who even called themselves al-Mahdi and circulated a hadith that they will eventually pass the leadership onto Hadhrat Isa (عليه السلام). Again, it is only through the hadith that one can derive such an understanding!

3.) I am not saying the twelve imams did not meet the criteria - what I am saying is that those Shia disagreed on the criteria themselves. Some thought armed uprising as a criteria whereas others were more quietest. I think this just reflects the attitude of different imams towards the situation.. The Twelver Imams such Ali ibn Husayn, al-Baqir and al-Sadiq had the betrayal at Karbala by the Kufans in their distant memory, and I really think they did not want to repeat this, hence why they encouraged their followers to piety and taqiyyah. They are humans after all. Imam Husayn's (a) uprising was the prime opportunity to win the imamate but they were let down by the Kufans :( - did they really want more bloodshed and wasted efforts when the people were not ready themselves?

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 minutes ago, gharib570 said:

1.) The Ismaili movement was on the horizon around the time of Ja'far as-Sadiq's (عليه السلام) death and within 100 years they have founded the largest Shia dynasty ever. Meanwhile, the Twelvers were still struggling after each imam who to pick - the book Firaq as-Shia by Nawbakhti is proof of this as it lists all the disagreements and Shia sects which was always about the number of imams.

This does make any value to me as you have already agreed that all 12 imams  are most virtuous,  most  knowledgeable and from the purified progeny of the prophet sa.w Ismailis and  zaidys may need to justify their belief for their departure from the path of 12 imams surely not myself.. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
19 minutes ago, gharib570 said:

2.) As for Imam Mahdi - it simply means a guided imam who guides to the Quran and Sunnah. Only after Husayn ibn 'Ali (as)'s passing did this become an extreme doctrine - of an imam who would return from the dead and slay all the enemies of the ahl al-Bayt. 

The beleif  in Imam Mahdi (عليه السلام) is common belief in sunni, shia and even non muslim also believe in a savior of humanity thus i here mention the need to improve your knowledge for this subject please.

However we have  common belief about following the two weighty things ie Quran and Ahl alabayt (عليه السلام) as both are never separated. I have tried to explore the numerical similarity by analysis among the two. If you like to see the following link  defines many diferent aspects:

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Zaydis do not believe there is sufficient proof outside of the Twelver Shia texts to substantiate a belief in a specific Twelve imams. Ismailis likewise point to the split at Jafar al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) and the fact that the majority of the Twelvers went to the wrong imam Abdullah after Jafar. It only took Abdullah to pass away until they realised Musa was their only choice. Again, I have told you time and time again that this is only one small example of how the proto-Twelver community would differ at the passing of an imam. Later on they had to invent bada in order to explain this affair why defies the claim of later Twelver scholars that all the imams were explictly named by the prophet (s).

Again, Zaydis believe 'Ali (a) was elected for his qualities, not because he was a descendent on the prophet (s) as such. This is where the confusion begins and why the Quraish wanted to overthrow him, as they could not take seeing the imamate and prophethood in one family - even Umar spills the beans on this one in al-Tabari in a conversation with Ibn Abbas. Being Shia is the most important regardless of how many imams you think there are ;)

As for common beliefs, most people believe Abu Bakr and Umar were best friends (s) of our prophet... does that make it right? No of course not

Edited by gharib570
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
16 minutes ago, gharib570 said:

Zaydis do not believe there is sufficient proof outside of the Twelver Shia texts to substantiate a belief in a specific Twelve imams.

قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ قَدْ جَاءَكُمُ الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ فَمَنِ اهْتَدَىٰ فَإِنَّمَا يَهْتَدِي لِنَفْسِهِ وَمَن ضَلَّ فَإِنَّمَا يَضِلُّ عَلَيْهَا وَمَا أَنَا عَلَيْكُم بِوَكِيلٍ

[shakir]: Say: O people! indeed there has come to you the truth from your Lord, therefore whoever goes aright, he goes aright only for the good of his own soul, and whoever goes astray, he goes astray only to the detriment of it, and I am not a custodian over you. (10:108)

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

This has gone severely off-topic!
--->The OP never said his number of Imams is less than 12<---

1. Mods/admins please move the {Fiver vs Sevener vs Twelver} discussion to another thread.
2. Guys, please stop using the "laugh" reaction as a "laughable" (mocking) reaction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...