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

Questions about Zaidi beliefs


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Salaam,

Recently, there have been many posts that talk about the differences between the Ithna 'ashariyya (12ers) and the Zaidis. Seeing that both groups adhere to the Shia branch of Islam, I have the following questions regarding the beliefs of the latter group. I know that some have already been asked and answered, but for the sake of learning, let's start from the beginning and hopefully have a fruitful and simple conversation. As our Zaidi brothers said:"members are free to open a thread to ask their questions, which we will personally answer Inshallah". They are:

1. Do Zaidis consider prophets and imams to be infallible ? My definition of infallible is someone than can sin but decides not to, and not that he can't sin (this would be the case for angels)

2. What about the 5 members of Ahlul Kisa (عليهم السلام) ?

3. Do you consider imams to be higher in rank than the prophets ? 

4. If not, then what about Imam Ali, Hassan and Hussain (عليهم السلام) ?

5. What are the conditions for someone to be an Imam ?

6. Can you please give me a list showing all of your historical Imams ?

7. Are there any Imams alive today ?

8a. If the answer is yes, who is he, where is he, what's his role, how is he guiding the ummah, etc...?

8b. If the answer is no, then why do you always criticize 12ers for having a hidden Imam that is supposedly failing to guide the ummah, when you don't even have a current Imam that is alive to begin with ? Or is it that you believe that it's not necessary for an Imam to be always present ?

9. What is your belief on Imam al-Mahdi (atf) ?

10. What are your main books (of hadith, jurisprudence, etc...) that you consider to be the most important and authentic (similar to our al-Kafi) ? 

11. What is your view on the first 3 caliphs ?

12. What is your view on the wives of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), specially 'Aisha ?

I would like it very much if the answers can be simple and short (no more than 2-3 lines). If you start writing more for each question, the thread would be too long. However, if you feel that a certain question requires a more detailed answer, then feel free to write as much as you like. Keep in mind that when you finish answering all my questions (hopefully), I'm gonna start asking even more questions according the your answers. I really hope I'm not bothering you or that I'm sort of tedious for asking all these questions, but Inshallah I see that this thread is going to be fun :D! Take all the time you need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I would like to thank you for your honesty and willingness to be fair and objective, May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless and reward you.

6 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

1. Do Zaidis consider prophets and imams to be infallible ? My definition of infallible is someone than can sin but decides not to, and not that he can't sin (this would be the case for angels)

2. What about the 5 members of Ahlul Kisa (عليهم السلام) ?

We believe that they are infallible, however, our belief in infallibility when it comes to the members of the cloak is that they are infallible from committing major sins meaning there is no way whatsoever they can commit such sins and they could commit minor sins, but that is not a proclamation that they do. Furthermore, it is possible that the members of cloak can procrastinate and forget things, again this is not saying that they're forgetful, or avid procrastinators, but it is merely maintaining the possibility. In the same sense an extremely disciplined individual can be said to have the possibility to procrastinate, although far be it from him/them.

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

3. Do you consider imams to be higher in rank than the prophets ? 

1. Angels

2. Messengers

3. Prophets

4. Imams 

It is important to note that this idea of ranking these righteous servants of Allah is not something which would be of fruitful benefit, as they all carried one message:

اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ وَاجْتَنِبُوا الطَّاغُوتَ

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

4. If not, then what about Imam Ali, Hassan and Hussain (عليهم السلام) ?

Imam Ali in Nahjul Balagha prays to be raised to the rank of Prophets, so it is logically and contextually coherent.

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

5. What are the conditions for someone to be an Imam ?

The Zaydi standards of Imam of Obedience is very high. 

A) Khilqiyah (الخلقية) (Born-qualities)

(1) Age of Majority and Sound 
(2) Man
(3) Free
(4) Alawi from the offspring of Hasnayn
(5) Sound Senses (سليم الحواس)
including: Free from major illnesses and non impairment of limbs 

(B) Iktisabiyyah (الاكتسابية) (Earned qualities)
(6) Mujtahid-mastered the knowledge of the Quran, Hadith, Usul Al-Fiqh, matters of Ijma and Arabic Language such as its Grammar and Syntax (نحو و صرف)

In addition the knowledge required for administration like economics and world politics and etc

(7) Just and Pious. 

Imam Al-Hadi (ع) explained the condition of piety  beautifully in Al-Ahkam as follow: 
ويكون ورعاً تقياً صحيحاً نقياً، وفي أمر اللَّه عز وجل جاهداً، وفي حطام الدنيا زاهدا
He should be absolutely God-Fearing in a true and pure manner, striving for the implementation of the decree of Allah the Most High and a Ascetic removed from the dissolute world.

On the issue of his justice: 

مقيماً لأحكام اللَّه، وحدوده، آخذاً لها ممن وجبت عليه، ووقعت بحكم اللَّه فيه من قريب، أو بعيد، شريف أو دني،
Establishing the Laws of Allah and its Hudud, taking from those that are mandated and executing the Laws of Allah  near or far, on the noble or the poor

(8) Generous in executing the rights of those who deserve.

Imam Al-Hadi (ع)  said:

سخياً، رؤفاً بالرعية، رحيماً، متعطفاً، متحنناً، حليماً، مواسياً لهم بنفسه

Being generous, compassionate on the subjects, forgiving, lenient on them.

(9) Able Administrator

Able to administer the affairs of the state.

(10) Being most virtuous of his time (أفضل أهل زمانه)
 
Meaning someone who fulfills the conditions of Imamat by Ijma on his excellence and virtue and is famous for it

(11) Chivalry and Bravery

This is needed to establish Amr Ma'ruf Nahi Al-Munkar against the oppressors 

Imam Al-Hadi (ع) said: 

مخيفاً للظالمين، مؤمناً للمؤمنين، لايأمن الفاسقين،
Fearsome for the Oppressors, Insurer for the Believers, no respite for the Sinners.

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

6. Can you please give me a list showing all of your historical Imams ?

Imams are kind of like Maraj3, they are highly respected and revered, but not to the point where we lift them to the degree of Ahlul Kisa and the early Imams, for example Sayyid Khomeini is pretty much a Zaydi Imam had he been a Zaydi. 

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

7. Are there any Imams alive today ?

No, however, there is always a person from either the sons of Al-Hassan/Hussein who is known to be the one that calls to himself in any time/era if the need for an Imam arises. In the meantime him and the scholars are continuously giving advice and seeking to maintain the peace. An example would be Sayyid Khamenei. The Iranian model is really what a Zaydi government would look like with the Imam and everything, or in other words Wali Faqih.

Our only question is why twelvers need to develop a theory 1000+ years after the occultation when they already have the Zaydi concept of Imamate, i.e twelverism being stagnate for that whole time.

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

8b. If the answer is no, then why do you always criticize 12ers for having a hidden Imam that is supposedly failing to guide the ummah, when you don't even have a current Imam that is alive to begin with ? Or is it that you believe that it's not necessary for an Imam to be always present ?

Great question, we don't believe that there always needs to be an Imam present - that is a twelver claim. However, as mentioned before, if the need for one arises it is already known who it would be that would call to himself. 

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

9. What is your belief on Imam al-Mahdi (atf) ?

He is not born yet, will be born in the end times. Not much more is emphasized, he is a promise of Allah, but to center the creed around his personage would cause it to stagnate. 

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

10. What are your main books (of hadith, jurisprudence, etc...) that you consider to be the most important and authentic (similar to our al-Kafi) ? 

 Can be found here with categories:

https://alzzaidi.wordpress.com/المكتبة-المقروءة-الزيدية/

5 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

11. What is your view on the first 3 caliphs ?

There is Ikhtilaf on the hukm for the transgression of Ahl Al-Saqifah against Amir Al-Mumineen and Sayyeda Al-Zahra. We have a range of opinions, Imam Ahmad bin Sulayman in Ma'rifah Al-Haqaiq said both of them deserve Hell-fire, in Durr Al-Hikmah he said both committed irtidad ie abandoned Islam. The other end of the spectrum we have Imam Yahya bin Hamza his view today is Mashur because he has done alot of tahqiq on the permissibility of doing Taraddhi and even narrated the Fadhail of them. 

Then we have the view of the Salaf like Imam Al-Hadi and Imam Qasim who did not send la'an on them but are displeased with their actions.

In short: We don't insult them, nor do tardhiyyah on them

As for Muawiyah and his ilk, they are Kuffar.

6 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

12. What is your view on the wives of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), specially 'Aisha ?

We can only do Hukm on what is apparent, she certainly transgressed, however, she repented and we leave her judgement to Allah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
59 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Imam Ali in Nahjul Balagha prays to be raised to the rank of Prophets, so it is logically and contextually coherent.

Well, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) prays for the forgiveness of his sins too (Kabira & Saghira both). See dua e Kumayl for reference. 

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

The Zaydi standards of Imam of Obedience is very high. 

Strange!!!

Where is "Ismah"???

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

for example Sayyid Khomeini is pretty much a Zaydi Imam had he been a Zaydi. 

:) Yes, he was not divinely appointed & not the bearer of "Ismah" which is specific for the Imams of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام)

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

No, however, there is always a person from either the sons of Al-Hassan/Hussein who is known to be the one that calls to himself in any time/era if the need for an Imam arises.

So does this means that the need of an Imam is conditional to any sort of sociopolitical need of the human society? 

وَيَقُولُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لَوْلآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ آيَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِ إِنَّمَا أَنتَ مُنذِرٌ وَلِكُلِّ قَوْمٍ هَادٍ

13:7

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Our only question is why twelvers need to develop a theory 1000+ years after the occultation when they already have the Zaydi concept of Imamate, i.e twelverism being stagnate for that whole time

Well that is only a concept of wilayatul faqih. 

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

we don't believe that there always needs to be an Imam present

Again strange!!!

Without the "Sahib e Amr" where would the "amr" of God descend? 

تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِم مِّن كُلِّ أَمْرٍ

97:4

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

He is not born yet, will be born in the end times. Not much more is emphasized, he is a promise of Allah, but to center the creed around his personage would cause it to stagnate. 

That is exactly the sunni belief. Promise of God is also that "for every nation there is a guide".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Zaidism Thank you so much for taking your time to answer my questions ! It really allowed me to have a better understanding about the beliefs of our Zaidi brothers. More questions will be asked later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Cool said:

Well, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) prays for the forgiveness of his sins too (Kabira & Saghira both). See dua e Kumayl for reference. 

Makes sense

7 hours ago, Cool said:

Where is "Ismah"

'Isma is for the members of Ahlul Kisa and ijma'h Al'itra

Anything one of the 5 members of the cloak does/says is Hujjah

Furthermore, the ijmah of the itrah is the consensus of the Ahlulbayt on a manner, for example Mutah being Haram. Otherwise it is okay to have ikhtilafat in matters in furoo3 as your Maraj3 do. Our Ismah is clear and straight to the point, yours again is a theory saved by the net of taqiyyah. 

Also, one of your Salaf - ibn Al-Junayd - didn't even believe in ismah, so you really aren't making a point lol. You don't need to believe in Ismah to be a twelver you know that right? 

7 hours ago, Cool said:

So does this means that the need of an Imam is conditional to any sort of sociopolitical need of the human society? 

You are acting as if your 12th Imam is administering guidance and providing to the needs of human society left and right

As stated, there will always be an apparent Imam when there is a need to rise against an unjust ruler, or assume statesmanship. Or one that possess those aforementioned qualities who gives naseeha to the government/rulership as did Imam Ali to the caliphs.

7 hours ago, Cool said:

Well that is only a concept of wilayatul faqih. 

That is a response to whoever subscribes to wilayat faqih 

7 hours ago, Cool said:

Without the "Sahib e Amr" where would the "amr" of God descend? 

You're - very badly - reading your Madhab into the Quran lol

7 hours ago, Cool said:

That is exactly the sunni belief. Promise of God is also that "for every nation there is a guide".

Not everything Sunnis say is wrong, we as Zaydis are the middle ground. I know your traditions are pretty much reactions to Sunni theology, so it makes sense why you'd jump at that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

@Zaidism Thank you so much for taking your time to answer my questions ! It really allowed me to have a better understanding about the beliefs of our Zaidi brothers. More questions will be asked later.

I am at your service, please ask as many questions as you'd like!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 6/19/2021 at 8:04 AM, Zaidism said:

I am at your service, please ask as many questions as you'd like!

You guys reject Nikah Mut'ah don't you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
28 minutes ago, Abdul-Hadi said:

You guys reject Nikah Mut'ah don't you?

Absolutely, it is considered fornication. 

Think of it like this, Islam came moderately at one point the Muslims could drink alcohol, but were forbidden to do so when praying. As the message developed, that verse was abrogated and alcohol became completely forbidden. 

Furthermore, the Quran states: 

The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. ... And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. {24:2}

I ask Akhi, if twelvers believe that in certain circumstances (a financially independent girl) can get into a Mutah contract without witnesses and the approval of a guardian, then those who commit Zina can simply say that they’re in a “Mutah Marriage”. Or those who actually are doing Mutah can be accused of Zina.  do you see the predicament here? The ones who are committing Zina can not be tried, and the one’s who are supposedly not committing Zina by doing Mutah could be tried unjustly. 

The implications on the societal level are very severe.

This form of “marriage” is illegitimate and even those who consider it legitimate always shy away from it, it’s quite embarrassing to say the least. It’s only now in the west that people have gotten bold about Mutah, because of the desensitization to illegitimate forms of sexual relations that is experienced here thanks to the Alphabet community and their sympathizers.

Whenever they refer to Khaybar and say that it was permitted there, they don’t show evidence that it was done without  witnesses. It’s evolved, but there are acceptable circumstances in their traditions as mentioned which go against the Quran and even Hadiths narrated by Imam Al’Sadiq. 

I would also like to mention that at times they’ll pull up an instance where Al-Abbas (the uncle of the Prophet) supposedly continued to engage in it, now whether that happened or not has no ground whatsoever with us. We have Hadiths from Imam Ali, Imam Zayd, Imam Sadiq, and the Imams from the Progeny of Imam Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein who relate their traditions from their forefathers testifying to the Impermissibility of this practice. 

I’m sure you’ve seen the threads where there are those who have the audacity to ask whether they can do Mutah behind the backs of their wives, or if they can do Mutah with a prostitute - which is technically permissible, but disliked by some scholars.

These are not the teachings of the Prophet and his pure Progeny, far be they from pushing their lovers toward such a heinous act. 

I may make a blogpost/thread responding to Mutah Insha’Allah in the future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Absolutely, it is considered fornication.

I actually agree with you, and I had heard that Zaidis held this belief so I wanted to see what you had to say about it.

 

 

3 hours ago, Zaidism said:

This form of “marriage” is illegitimate and even those who consider it legitimate always shy away from it, it’s quite embarrassing to say the least. It’s only now in the west that people have gotten bold about Mutah, because of the desensitization to illegitimate forms of sexual relations that is experienced here thanks to the Alphabet community and their sympathizers.

I have seen threads both here and on other sites where there will be brothers asking "Can Mutah only have a duration of an hour?" and then when you confront them about their reasoning for wanting to do this, they become enraged at you and will hit you with every proof-text they can find that says that Mutah is ok. More often than not, the excuse I hear is "I live in an immoral society and I need to be able to fulfill my urges!" and my response is always the same:

You need to control your urges better.

I live in that same Western society that is awash in fornication and immorality, I'm a product of that society, and I have no problem keeping my mind out of the gutter. I don't go out ogling women when I leave the house, because I know that in order to remain pure, there is a part of the social contract that I as a man, need to fulfill.

I'm getting sick of seeing little brothers asking about mutah because "It's so hard living in America". It's really not hard at all. You have to discipline your body and mind to not be preoccupied with sex all of the time. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) doesn't owe you anything, least of all sex because sex is designed for procreation and the reason that it feels good, is to encourage you to have many children. It's not some recreation, some sport that you get to engage in because you have "urges" and I see Mutah as having a different historical purpose anyway that isn't really meant for situations we have now where a journey that would take months now takes a few hours or days at the most.

 

 

3 hours ago, Zaidism said:

then those who commit Zina can simply say that they’re in a “Mutah Marriage”. Or those who actually are doing Mutah can be accused of Zina.  do you see the predicament here?

Absolutely, and if your intention with Mutah is to "make it last an hour before the contract expires" then you're committing Zina in your heart and only looking for a religious workaround because you incorrectly think that you can trick and deceive Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and I probably shouldn't say this but what the heck, that notion makes me legitimately angry. It's so terribly obvious why all of these "Mutah" threads get made, and it plays into the offensive stereotype that "Muslim men cannot control themselves" which then opens the door for Western liberals to assert "Since Muslim men cannot control themselves, we need to step in and control them" and then before you know it, your government has been occupying Iraq and Afghanistan for twenty years (and could care less what you think about it, too!)

 

 

3 hours ago, Zaidism said:

I’m sure you’ve seen the threads where there are those who have the audacity to ask whether they can do Mutah behind the backs of their wives, or if they can do Mutah with a prostitute - which is technically permissible, but disliked by some scholars.

Oh have I ever. The people making these threads ought to feel shame for even asking, because what it says to me is "I don't value women's dignity that much and see them as a tool that primarily exist to satisfy my urges". urges. It's always about urges rather than being upright and controlling these urges for the sake of your dignity and that of the woman. I may not be a scholar, but I see it for exactly what it is and it nauseates me, because as Muslims we are called by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to be above all of that nonsense. We are called to control ourselves and put our animalistic "urges" to death in order to fulfill a higher purpose. The same goes with the brothers who are hyperventilating about getting married as young as possible. You don't get married just to have sex. I'll reiterate it just in case the boys weren't listening: women are human beings with dignity. They are not your possession to use to satisfy your urges, because sorry, sex is not something that you are entitled to. Once again, it exists for procreation. If you're not going to, with Allah's (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) blessing, potentially bring a new life into the world, then what is the point?

I can't imagine being a sister and what it's got to be like to see all of these "mutah" threads all the time. It would make me feel objectified and probably develop a negative self-image rather than the image that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) says that I have: a unique person with dignity and value who is loved by her creator and who has rights and responsibilities to society that are unique to those of men. I can't imagine being taken seriously as a Muslim man if I'm approaching a woman in 1442 AH and arguing that she should "temporarily marry me for an hour" so that I can "satisfy my urges". Marriage is a commitment and in an age where travel is so fast that even long journeys take about a day, there is no logical reason for mutah to even still be a thing. Men need to control themselves better.


So thanks for the info on what Zaidis believe regarding Mutah, because it seems like we definitely agree on something important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother @Abdul-Hadi it is always a delight to read your well thought out and excellently articulated posts on virtually any thread, irrespective of what the topic is you always have something of great value and substance to add! May Allah bless you, If you have any more questions please do not hesitate to ask :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Zaidism said:

As the message developed, that verse was abrogated

Can you tell us which verse abrogates Mut'ah marriage ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

Can you tell us which verse abrogates Mut'ah marriage ?

I was referring to the concept of abrogation, however, these verses are clear when it comes to the necessity of having witnesses and the approval of a guardian. 

As mentioned even when this Mutah in Khaybar was being practiced, there still was a need for witnesses, unlike the past permissibility of drinking alcohol.

There is no blame upon you for that to which you [indirectly] allude concerning a proposal to women or for what you conceal within yourselves. Allah knows that you will have them in mind. But do not promise them secretly except for saying a proper saying. And do not determine to undertake a marriage contract until the decreed period reaches its end. And know that Allah knows what is within yourselves, so beware of Him. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing. {2:240}

And whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls. And Allah is most knowing about your faith. You [believers] are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation [i.e., mahr] according to what is acceptable. [They should be] chaste, neither [of] those who commit unlawful intercourse randomly nor those who take [secret] lovers. But once they are sheltered in marriage, if they should commit adultery, then for them is half the punishment for free [unmarried] women. This [allowance] is for him among you who fears affliction [i.e., sin], but to be patient is better for you. And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. {4:25}

And whoever among you cannot [find] the means to marry free, believing women, then [he may marry] from those whom your right hands possess of believing slave girls. And Allah is most knowing about your faith. You [believers] are of one another. So marry them with the permission of their people and give them their due compensation according to what is acceptable. {4:34}

Twelvers concede that there is a need to have witnesses during a divorce, but say there is no evidence for the necessity to have them when two believers are seeking to get “married” in the case of Mutah. 

https://research.rafed.net/أسئلة-وردود/313-النكاح/1141-ما-الدليل-على-عدم-وجوب-شهود-في-عقد-الزواج-؟

I wonder how one would tie one end with witnesses and leave the more important end loose.

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Zaidism So what you basically find to be the main problem about mut'ah is that there's no need for witnesses ? If witnesses were needed, would you perhaps be more willing to accept it ?

Could you also show some sources (12er of course) where people needed to have witnesses for engaging in mut'ah during Khaybar ?

I have personally done some research about mut'ah marriage, and I find it to be completely normal and allowed (I see no problem with it). But of course, I don't want to argue with you, as this topic is dedicated only for our Zaidi brothers to simply answer our questions and explain their faith, and not to engage in debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

So what you basically find to be the main problem about mut'ah is that there's no need for witnesses ? If witnesses were needed, would you perhaps be more willing to accept it ?

Quran is clear on the need for witnesses, and it’s completely logical. How are you going to lash two people who committed Zina if they say they were doing Mutah and vice versa - you need witnesses. 

12 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

Could you also show some sources (12er of course) where people needed to have witnesses for engaging in mut'ah during Khaybar ?

My point is twelvers claim that the Mutah in Khaybar was done without witnesses  where is the evidence for that?

12 hours ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

I find it to be completely normal and allowed 

Of course, in twelver traditions you can definitely prove Mutah to be permissible, but that doesn’t mean it’s correct it just shows more people attributing false sayings/beliefs to the Imams. 

المذهب الأمامي هو مذهب المنقول 

المذهب الزيدي هو مذهب المعقول والمنقول

Our sources for Mut’ah being forbidden:

https://alkazemalzaidy2013.wordpress.com/tag/قول-أئمة-الزيدية-في-زواج-المُتعة/

Look at this response from one of our scholars.

He mentions some very critical points namely,

• Twelvers claim to take Hadiths from Al-Sadiq, Al-Baqir, Al-Kadhim علیهم السلام, but in reality it is only that which your narrators attribute to them. 

• None of your narrators are from the Ahlulbayt, nor are they from the sons of the Ahlulbayt!

• You take nothing from the sons of the Ahlulbayt 

• There is a consensus between the Ahlulbayt that Mut’ah is haram.

• You are all lost in this sea of Taqiyyah and as you sift between conflicting narrations, you finally arrive at a ruling given to you by other then the Ahlulbayt attributed to the Ahlulbayt!

Here are our sources for the illegitimacy of Mut’ah, just look at the chain, everyone is from the Ahlulbayt! Sons narrating about their fathers and so on, whereas you have people like Yunus bin Abdulrahman, Hisham bin Al-Hakm, Zurrarah, Abu Baseer, etc.

None of them is from the Ahlulbayt! Go read the فهرست of الطوسي to see their history, they were all Abbasid servants. Furthermore, who is more of an authority the sons of the Imams who narrate directly from their fathers, or Abbasid bodyguards and close confidants who live far away from the Imams?!

قال السيّد العلامة الحسين بن يحيى الحوثي :

 ((وأما الشيعة والمراد بهم الإمامية فانحرافهم عن أهل البيت غير الاثني عشر ظاهر لا ينكر وكيف يستحلون المتعة. وقد روى النسخ والتحريم واشتراط الولي سادات أولاد الحسنين – عليهم السلام – وغيرهم كما قدمنا ذكرهم بدون مبالاة ولم يجعلوا رواياتهم تفيد الشبهة فيتوقفون ويحتاطون لدينهم ؛ فالمؤمنون وقّافون عند الشبهات ، ولم يذكروا غير الاثنى عشر [ يُريدُ أنّهم لا يُعوّلون على سادات بني الحسن والحسين من أهل البيت غير أئمتهم الاثني عشر ] في كتبهم في إصدار ولا إيراد، ولم يلتفتوا إلى رواياتهم ولا تواريخهم إلا نزراً بأن يذكروهم ثُوَّاراً. وأما اعتمادهم على الباقر والصادق والرضا والكاظم – عليهم السـلام – فهو ذهاب إلى سراب بقيعة ؛ لأنهم لا يَروون عنهم إلا بوسائط من أسْلافهم

ليسَ فيهم أحد من أولاد النبي – صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم –

. وإنما اعتمادهم في الحقيقة على هشام بن الحكم وهشام بن سالم، وصاحب الطاق ثم على الطبرسي والطوسي والكليني والمفيد ؛ فهؤلاء في الحقيقة عندهم سفينة نوح يدورون معهم أينما داروا

وأولاد الحسنين عنها في معزل. )) . [ الجواب الكاشف للالتباس عن مسائل الإفريقي إلياس ، ويليه الجواب الراقي عن مسائل العراقي ، للسيد العلامة الحسين بن يحيى الحوثي ] .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Aslamalayqum , I am failing to understand Zaidi ideology everything has to be substantiated through logic.

I fail to understand the logic of Zaydiya they seem to subscribe to Hadith al kisaa .But at the same time they don't believe the people of the cloak to be infallible. It's a kind of half infallibility if such a concept exists.

They say this half baked concept of Immamat that they believe in ended with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) yet they cannot prove this point from Sunni sources. 

At the same time they reject numerous traditions from the Sunni sources mentioning 12 Aimma (عليه السلام) under different pretexts.

Furthermore the Ayah of tatheer 33.33 where Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) wishes to purify the people of the cloak clearly means just that.  The Zaidi say the people of the cloak can forget and commit minor sins therby negating Ayah 33.33.

This view seems to conflict with Quran. The purpose of the Imammah after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was to interpret the religion for the masses According to the Zaiydiya the Divine Imamat ends at 61 AH .It is established fact the subsequent centuries is where most of the different sects and Ideologies developed. 

It makes no sense for Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to end Divinely appointed Imammat at 61 AH when the subsequent decades & centuries is where turmoil  , different ideologies appeared. 

We cannot attribute this unwise act to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) as this would negate his Adl/ Justice as Islam was the religion till Yaum al qiyamah and it's interpretation was not yet complete. 

This leads to fundamental questions whilst the Zaidi ignore the plethora of hadiths mentioning 12 divinly appointed Imam from both Shia & Sunni hadith , they cannot bring forth a single Quranic verse to assert their view .

Primarily being that any Individual from the Hasani/ Hussaini lineage can be Imam. I would add as we speak the Houthi are engaged in a war against a unjust ruler in Yemen.  The concept is rendered useless while Khuruj is taking place in Yemen a fundamental principle they apply to Imammat after it's Divine end according to them. 

Not a single Hasani/ Hussaini Sayad has come forward to guide the Zayidah and announce his Imamat . Zaiydiya Imamat has been useless now for centuries particularly the last century. 

It's a concept limited to just that a impractical concept. The irony is these are the very grounds that the Zaydiya reject the concept of occultation of the Twelvth Imam.

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in his infinite wisdom would of never ended Divine appointment at 61 AH with the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام). 

It was incumbent upon Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to give us the leaders/ Imams until the interpretation of the Divine faith was complete. 

This is why just like the sun helps from behind the clouds to sustain life on earth. The Imam of our time Imam Muhammad Mahdi may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) hasten his appearance plays a similar role. 

While his predecessors completed the task of the interpretation of Islam he will return to complete his task of making Islam reign supreme. 

In the meantime his guidance to the Shia is as explained in his last letter before the major occultation to turn to the Scholars. Upon whom the Imam himself is hujjat so we are never without his guidance. 

Wasalam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

I think the problem here is the type of reasoning. If you already have a theory and then try and find evidence you will.

The other way is you look at the evidence. And remove your bias. What does the evidence show. It may not make logical sense to you but that doesn't matter you take evidence for what it is.

Eg in science your theory may make complete sense but the the experiment gives results that make no sense and go directly against your theory. Bin your theory and look for new evidences and formulate a hypothesis based on the evidence.

 

Edited by Ali bin Hussein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

As for Zaidi aqeeda very simple based on evidence. Let's go straight to Imamat.

Is there a general concept of leadership in Qur'an. Yes does that fit the general qualities that Zaidi look for in an Imam yes.

Are there any other qualities specified in Mutawatir hadith. Yes follow Ahlulbayt.

So take general qualities of leadership mentioned in Qur'an apply Mutawatir hadith....and you have the general Zaidi concept of Imamat.

Very simple no mental gymnastics required.

Is there any evidence for any one specifically designated by Allah as an Imam 

Yes multiple mutuwatir hadith and tafseer of Quranic ayat all found in Sunni book for the Imamat of Ali.

Specific Imamat with plenty of evidence.

Now take this level of evidence and compare it to your specific Imamat of 12 infallible individual. Can it stand up to the level of evidence presented for only Imam Ali.....?

End of day it's up to you what approach you take. Everyone uses a combination of inductive and deductive.

Edited by Ali bin Hussein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

my simple summary

Do you have an inductive heavy or deductive heavy approach ?

More inductive go with 12er or Zaidi or Sunni or whatever based on your preconceived bias and thought conditioning and multiple other factors which determines what "makes sense to you".

More deductive go with Zaidi.

 

That's as simple as I can make it.

 

 Inshallah we will be rewarded  for our sincerity to follow Ahlulbayt.

Edited by Ali bin Hussein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Ali bin Hussein said:

As for Zaidi aqeeda very simple based on evidence. Let's go straight to Imamat.

Is there a general concept of leadership in Qur'an. Yes does that fit the general qualities that Zaidi look for in an Imam yes.

Are there any other qualities specified in Mutawatir hadith. Yes follow Ahlulbayt.

So take general qualities of leadership mentioned in Qur'an apply Mutawatir hadith....and you have the general Zaidi concept of Imamat.

Very simple no mental gymnastics required.

Is there any evidence for any one specifically designated by Allah as an Imam 

Yes multiple mutuwatir hadith and tafseer of Quranic ayat all found in Sunni book for the Imamat of Ali.

Specific Imamat with plenty of evidence.

Now take this level of evidence and compare it to your specific Imamat of 12 infallible individual. Can it stand up to the level of evidence presented for only Imam Ali.....?

End of day it's up to you what approach you take. Everyone uses a combination of inductive and deductive.

Salam Akhi, with due respect Zaidi divine Imamat ends with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) this makes no sense as Islam went through turbulent times in the following decades and centuries. 

Evidence is subjective as everyone will present their evidence.  You have no evidence from either Sunni or Shia sources to your claim it ended with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام). 

Furthermore everyone can build their criteria from Quran for qualities of Immamat the Ithnasheri can provide more abundance of Quran Ayah than Zaidi.  

The logic & reasoning doesn't support your view as like us you believe in Adl / justice of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).  It doesn't become of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to designate Imams who can sin & forget .

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) then randomly decides to end this faulty notion of Immamat at 61 AH. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is the all knowing and All wise this illogical Immamat and it's abrupt end at 61 AH cannot be attributed to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). 

It was incumbent upon Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to allow the interpretation of Islam to reach it's finality so his creation can have no argument on Yaum al qiyamah. 

We don't need long exhaustive polemics to ascertain what is right or wrong. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has blessed us with intellectual capacity. 

Divine Immamat did not end at 61 AH with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) and the Ummah in turmoil this action is illogical and we do not attribute illogical concepts and reasoning to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) otherwise our belief in Adl/ justice is compromised. 

Wasalam 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Aslamalayqum

Wa'alaykom As-Salam Wa'Rahmatullah 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

But at the same time they don't believe the people of the cloak to be infallible.

We do believe in their infallibility, the people of the cloak do not err in judgement when it comes to matters of the religion, their testimony is accepted as one and what they say is an obligation for us to follow. They cannot possibly commit any of the major sins, they are completely infallible in that regard, as for minor sins and errancies, or possibly procrastinating they can commit such acts. We see Prophets in the Quran committing minor sins and asking forgiveness from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) therefore it is reasonable to say that the members of the cloak (aside from the Prophet) who are less in status than the Prophets of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) can commit those acts as well. Of course, it isn't to say that they do, rather it is to postulate the possibility.

I also find it odd that you are stuck on this issue of infallibility, we don't deny it. However, we see one of your grand scholars who lived at the time of Sheikh Kulayni, who is considered to be on your most reliable jurists in the post-occultation period denying the infallibility of the Imams, so I ask if this is something which is at odds with you in your own school, how are you going to bring it as a point of contention with us?

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

They say this half baked concept of Immamat that they believe in ended with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) yet they cannot prove this point from Sunni sources. 

 

Lets have some respect when inquiring?

We can prove it from Sunni sources quite succinctly, I don't know why you'd want to go that route since you are a twelver? 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

At the same time they reject numerous traditions from the Sunni sources mentioning 12 Aimma (عليه السلام) under different pretexts.

You mean one solitary report that contradicts itself in the matn, contradicts its presupposition when mentioning Abu Bakr being the first of the twelve in other chains, and never once used to prove the Imamate of your Imams before the occultation? 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

The Zaidi say the people of the cloak can forget and commit minor sins therby negating Ayah 33.33.

This is you reading your own presumptions of infallibility and purification into the verse, one needs to first objectively understand the meaning of رجس 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

This view seems to conflict with Quran. The purpose of the Imammah after the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was to interpret the religion for the masses According to the Zaiydiya the Divine Imamat ends at 61 AH .It is established fact the subsequent centuries is where most of the different sects and Ideologies developed. 

Of course you would think that, it is baseless unless you demonstrate it. 

The purpose of Imamate for you is to guide in every time, place, and era, and the twelfth Imam fundamentally does not guide, I don't think you can genuinely come to that conclusion logically. 

No, Imamate does not end, it is very active. However, only when necessary, when it comes to political governing and uprising. Unlike your presupposition that Imamate is to just guide in matters of religion, religion is clear we need those knowledgeable in it to implement it. Twelvers unfortunately have halted the Shariah for over 1000 years! Even the Friday prayer is not obligatory, Subhanallah. Your Imamate is relative and nothing more. That is why you had great people like Sayyid Khomeini establish a government that is fundamentally rooted in a Zaydi type model! You will continue to evolve and change.

Yes, many sects and ideologies emerged and the only one that stayed consistent, that didn't have to evolve into an Usooli school, that didn't need to go through rigorous reinterpretations is the Zaydi school. The school the the Imams and their sons all followed for the first 3-5 centuries (A.H)!

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

We cannot attribute this unwise act to Allah

But it is wise to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) obliges us to follow an Imam without a Hadith that designates him, with that a source to his name, without evidence of his guidance, and without means to reach him? And above that we will be thrown into hellfire, because we couldn't wrap our heads around this illogical request, Exalted is the Most Merciful above all that which you ascribe to Him!

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

it's interpretation was not yet complete. 

Interpretation in what? As you know matters of Usool al-deen are stable and intact until the day of Judgement, therefore, what remains is principal matters of jurisprudence, I ask if the interpretation is not complete what makes you say this model of deriving rulings utilized by the scholars today, which does not resemble the model used in the past, is the correct means to interpret the religion? Again, you are back to fairytale land where the Imam has this precise means to go to the most infinitesimal detail and give a ruling from there, believe me that is amazing, but you need to understand that the world and especially the Shariah does not revolve around idealistic fairytales when it comes to Imamate and if your scholars followed with your reasoning you guys would be extinct. 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

plethora of hadiths mentioning 12 divinly appointed Imam

Let me make something clear.

There is not, nor will you ever find a Hadith which mentions 12 Imams by name, or by number at that, which isn't particular to the works of those compilers in the post-occultation period. The 12 Caliph Sunni Solitary Hadith (that does not exist in Zaydi works) is an Abbasid forgery used to counter the revolts of the Zaidiyyah. 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Primarily being that any Individual from the Hasani/ Hussaini lineage can be Imam. I would add as we speak the Houthi are engaged in a war against a unjust ruler in Yemen.  The concept is rendered useless while Khuruj is taking place in Yemen a fundamental principle they apply to Imammat after it's Divine end according to them. 

You are asking about Zaydi Imamate, because you don't know about it, and at the same time you are refuting it on false premises? 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Not a single Hasani/ Hussaini Sayad has come forward to guide the Zayidah and announce his Imamat . Zaiydiya Imamat has been useless now for centuries particularly the last century. 

I really don't know what to say to this brother, I can give you a list of at least 50 on the top of my head.

Again, you don't know anything about Zaydi Imamate and while inquiring you are somehow refuting it, Mashallah! Your intentions to learn are very clear :) 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

It's a concept limited to just that a impractical concept. The irony is these are the very grounds that the Zaydiya reject the concept of occultation of the Twelvth Imam.

Brother, at this point I don't want to assume you are trolling, but I can't take this seriously.

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) in his infinite wisdom would of never ended Divine appointment at 61 AH with the martyrdom of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام). 

Exactly

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

It was incumbent upon Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) to give us the leaders/ Imams 

I agree

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

This is why just like the sun helps from behind the clouds to sustain life on earth. The Imam of our time Imam Muhammad Mahdi may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) hasten his appearance plays a similar role. 

No, he doesn't  

refer to:

 

22 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

In the meantime his guidance to the Shia is as explained in his last letter before the major occultation to turn to the Scholars. Upon whom the Imam himself is hujjat so we are never without his guidance. 

Mashallah, his guidance is found between scholars/jurists who can't seem to reach a consensus on the very fundamental tenants of your Imamate and who are constantly differing in matters of principality.

 

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Wa'alaykom As-Salam Wa'Rahmatullah 

We do believe in their infallibility, the people of the cloak do not err in judgement when it comes to matters of the religion, their testimony is accepted as one and what they say is an obligation for us to follow. They cannot possibly commit any of the major sins, they are completely infallible in that regard, as for minor sins and errancies, or possibly procrastinating they can commit such acts. We see Prophets in the Quran committing minor sins and asking forgiveness from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) therefore it is reasonable to say that the members of the cloak (aside from the Prophet) who are less in status than the Prophets of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) can commit those acts as well. Of course, it isn't to say that they do, rather it is to postulate the possibility.

Lets have some respect when inquiring?

We can prove it from Sunni sources quite succinctly, I don't know why you'd want to go that route since you are a twelver? 

You mean one solitary report that contradicts itself in the matn, contradicts its presupposition when mentioning Abu Bakr being the first of the twelve in other chains, and never once used to prove the Imamate of your Imams before the occultation? 

This is you reading your own presumptions of infallibility and purification into the verse, one needs to first objectively understand the meaning of رجس 

Of course you would think that, it is baseless unless you demonstrate it. 

The purpose of Imamate for you is to guide and the twelfth Imam fundamentally does not guide, I don't think you can genuinely come that conclusion logically. 

No, Imamate does not end, it is very active. However, only when necessary, when it comes to political governing and uprising. Unlike your presupposition that Imamate is to just guide in matters of religion, religion is clear we need those knowledgeable in it to implement it. Twelvers unfortunately have halted the Shariah for over 1000 years! Even the Friday prayer is not obligatory, Subhanallah. Your Imamate is relative and nothing more. That is why you had great people like Sayyid Khomeini establish a government that is fundamentally rooted in a Zaydi type model! You will continue to evolve and change.

Yes, many sects and ideologies emerged and the only one that stayed consistent, that didn't have to evolve into an Usooli school, that didn't need to go through rigorous reinterpretations is the Zaydi school. The school the the Imams and their sons all followed for the first 3-5 centuries (A.H)!

But it is wise to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) obliges us to follow an Imam without a Hadith that designates him, with that a source to his name, without evidence of his guidance, and without means to reach him? And above that we will be thrown into hellfire, because we couldn't wrap our heads around this illogical request, Exalted is the Most Merciful above all that which you ascribe to Him!

Interpretation in what? As you know matters of Usool al-deen are stable and intact until the day of Judgement, therefore, what remains is principal matters of jurisprudence, I ask if the interpretation is not complete what makes you say this model of deriving rulings utilized by the scholars today, which does not resemble the model used in the past, is the correct means to interpret the religion? Again, you are back to fairytale land where the Imam has this precise means to go to the most infinitesimal detail and give a ruling from there, believe me that is amazing, but you need to understand that the world and especially the Shariah does not revolve around idealistic fairytales when it comes to Imamate and if your scholars followed with your reasoning you guys would be extinct. 

Let me make something clear.

There is not, nor will you ever find a Hadith which mentions 12 Imams by name, or by number at that, which isn't particular to the works of those compilers in the post-occultation period. The 12 Caliph Sunni Solitary Hadith (that does not exist in Zaydi works) is an Abbasid forgery used to counter the revolts of the Zaidiyyah. 

You are asking about Zaydi Imamate, because you don't know about it, and at the same time you are refuting it on false premises? 

I really don't know what to say to this brother, I can give you a list of at least 50 on the top of my head.

Again, you don't know anything about Zaydi Imamate and while inquiring you are somehow refuting it, Mashallah! Your intentions to learn are very clear :) 

Brother, at this point I don't want to assume you are trolling, but I can't take this seriously.

Exactly

I agree

No, he doesn't  

refer to:

 

Mashallah, his guidance is found between scholars/jurists who can't seem to reach a consensus of the very fundamental tenants of your Imamate and who are constantly differing in matters of principality.

We are obedient to the Imam in his occultation the guidance he left us we refer to the scholars who may differ on minor issues they do not differ on Usool. 

You have provided no evidence Yannabi al mavadah chapter 76 names all the Imams it's Sunni book. There numerous hadith that state the number 12 from Sunni works. 

The Sunnis had no reason to have these reports in their books as they don't believe in the occultation. I know your next accusation is going to be Abbasid forgery another nonsensical argument. 

It's very unfortunate that you act as if the latter Imams were free to act guide as they wished . This again is illogical assumption because your demands for a designation have already been proven through the numerous hadith in the Sunni works that mentioned 12 Imams.

I noticed in numerous threads you refuse to acknowledge the Abbasids were looking for the 12th Imam son Imam Hasan Askri (عليه السلام). 

Suffice is to say you have no evidence that the Divine Immamat ended with Hussain (عليه السلام) in 61 AH neither from Quran neither from Sunni sources. 

You very cleverly sugar coat the fact your notion of faulty infallibility is unintelligible. 

You say the Divine Imam can forget & commit minor sins so the possibility is always there for forgetfulness and mistakes irrelevant of how you present it.

So the Divine leader is hampered in carrying out his God given duty. Either there is infallibility or there isn't very simple in your concept of Immamat nothing stops the Divine leader from the possibility of sin minor/ major exists. 

So these illogical concepts and abrupt end to Imammat cannot be attributed to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) he would never leave the Ummah in disarray. This is precisely our argument against Sunnis and you agree with us on this.

Later in your history your sect does precisely what it accused the Sunni sect of doing namely leaving the Ummah in disarray with the abrupt and inconclusive end to Imammat at 61 AH.

We do not attribute these illogical actions to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) far above all this is Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) whose promise was fulfilled so his servants have no argument against him on Yaum al qiyamah. 

Wasalam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Wa'alaykom As-Salam Wa'Rahmatullah 

We do believe in their infallibility, the people of the cloak do not err in judgement when it comes to matters of the religion, their testimony is accepted as one and what they say is an obligation for us to follow. They cannot possibly commit any of the major sins, they are completely infallible in that regard, as for minor sins and errancies, or possibly procrastinating they can commit such acts. We see Prophets in the Quran committing minor sins and asking forgiveness from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) therefore it is reasonable to say that the members of the cloak (aside from the Prophet) who are less in status than the Prophets of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) can commit those acts as well. Of course, it isn't to say that they do, rather it is to postulate the possibility.

I also find it odd that you are stuck on this issue of infallibility, we don't deny it. However, we see one of your grand scholars who lived at the time of Sheikh Kulayni, who is considered to be on your most reliable jurists in the post-occultation period denying the infallibility of the Imams, so I ask if this is something which is at odds with you in your own school, how are you going to bring it as a point of contention with us?

Lets have some respect when inquiring?

We can prove it from Sunni sources quite succinctly, I don't know why you'd want to go that route since you are a twelver? 

You mean one solitary report that contradicts itself in the matn, contradicts its presupposition when mentioning Abu Bakr being the first of the twelve in other chains, and never once used to prove the Imamate of your Imams before the occultation? 

This is you reading your own presumptions of infallibility and purification into the verse, one needs to first objectively understand the meaning of رجس 

Of course you would think that, it is baseless unless you demonstrate it. 

The purpose of Imamate for you is to guide in every time, place, and era, and the twelfth Imam fundamentally does not guide, I don't think you can genuinely come to that conclusion logically. 

No, Imamate does not end, it is very active. However, only when necessary, when it comes to political governing and uprising. Unlike your presupposition that Imamate is to just guide in matters of religion, religion is clear we need those knowledgeable in it to implement it. Twelvers unfortunately have halted the Shariah for over 1000 years! Even the Friday prayer is not obligatory, Subhanallah. Your Imamate is relative and nothing more. That is why you had great people like Sayyid Khomeini establish a government that is fundamentally rooted in a Zaydi type model! You will continue to evolve and change.

Yes, many sects and ideologies emerged and the only one that stayed consistent, that didn't have to evolve into an Usooli school, that didn't need to go through rigorous reinterpretations is the Zaydi school. The school the the Imams and their sons all followed for the first 3-5 centuries (A.H)!

But it is wise to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) obliges us to follow an Imam without a Hadith that designates him, with that a source to his name, without evidence of his guidance, and without means to reach him? And above that we will be thrown into hellfire, because we couldn't wrap our heads around this illogical request, Exalted is the Most Merciful above all that which you ascribe to Him!

Interpretation in what? As you know matters of Usool al-deen are stable and intact until the day of Judgement, therefore, what remains is principal matters of jurisprudence, I ask if the interpretation is not complete what makes you say this model of deriving rulings utilized by the scholars today, which does not resemble the model used in the past, is the correct means to interpret the religion? Again, you are back to fairytale land where the Imam has this precise means to go to the most infinitesimal detail and give a ruling from there, believe me that is amazing, but you need to understand that the world and especially the Shariah does not revolve around idealistic fairytales when it comes to Imamate and if your scholars followed with your reasoning you guys would be extinct. 

Let me make something clear.

There is not, nor will you ever find a Hadith which mentions 12 Imams by name, or by number at that, which isn't particular to the works of those compilers in the post-occultation period. The 12 Caliph Sunni Solitary Hadith (that does not exist in Zaydi works) is an Abbasid forgery used to counter the revolts of the Zaidiyyah. 

You are asking about Zaydi Imamate, because you don't know about it, and at the same time you are refuting it on false premises? 

I really don't know what to say to this brother, I can give you a list of at least 50 on the top of my head.

Again, you don't know anything about Zaydi Imamate and while inquiring you are somehow refuting it, Mashallah! Your intentions to learn are very clear :) 

Brother, at this point I don't want to assume you are trolling, but I can't take this seriously.

Exactly

I agree

No, he doesn't  

refer to:

 

Mashallah, his guidance is found between scholars/jurists who can't seem to reach a consensus on the very fundamental tenants of your Imamate and who are constantly differing in matters of principality.

 

The scholars may differ or make mistakes or not understand infallibility these were fallible men. 

As for your Abbasid forgery claims about the plethora of Hadith from Sunni sources I suppose you do need a excuse to reject so it suits your narrative. 

The other issue is your Zaidi works are not widely available otherwise we would find so much more reason to refute you. I believe there is more than one sect in Zayidah and even your scholars have no consensus on vital issues. 

So the point you make about our scholars goes right back at you. One of your main Imams/ scholars believed in cursing Abu Bakr & Umar yet you don't don't do it today so does that negate his Immamat / scholarship today ??? 

Where is your Imam in Yemen today so there is not one Hasani/ Hussaini Sayad available to declare his Immamat while a khuruj is taking place in your heartland???

This shows your model of Imamat is a failure & illogical and neither can you prove to be true from independent sources.

Wasalam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

@Ultimate truth  This is a thread for asking about Zaydi beliefs not asking and simultaneously 'refuting' them based on misconception.

 

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

More and More I read the Conjecture/Spin and "Well mannered"/pleasing/sugar coated responses. I can't shake this feeling that ALL in the end is the derivative of these two Man Made concepts/Mistakes which have to be defended.

So, partial infallibility, will have to do to justify the Tragedy of Thursday, Ahlul Kisa(عليه السلام) need to be just ordinary to Justify Fadaq. Imamate needs to be diluted to justify Saqifa. He is dead, need to be propagate to justify the golden speech of the first.

here ponder over it, these version(s)- sect/sects of these different Fallible Jurists of Fiqh / political leaders - are built on these premises, besides Imami Shia All the other followers of Jurits or Quranists or Zaidi - they all are evolved version of the same thing. 

Quote

A] That the book of Allah is sufficient for us. [2] [2A]

 

B]   “ ..one who worshipped Muhammad Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam should know that Sayyidina Rasulullah Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam had passed away, the one who worships Allah, let him know that Allah is living and will live for ever..” [3]

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235034818-a-dialogue-on-your-understanding-of-shirk/?tab=comments#comment-2880077

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

@Ultimate truth You have the freedom to be wrong brother, have a good day :) 

20 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

@Ultimate truth You have the freedom to be wrong brother, have a good day :) 

Brother are you  jarudiya, Batriyah , Talbiyah, salmiyah nasiriyah to name but a few your sect has a history of evolution. 

First your sect was taking its jurisprudence from Imam Baqir (عليه السلام). & Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام). then there was a later time where  under Hanfiyah influence you created your own Madhab.

Historically there was a time when Zayidah was pro Ibadhi ,Mutazilite then later became anti Ibadhi Mutazilite.  Some of you still believe the Quran is created . It's a history of contradictions and ideological shifts. 

Even on subjects pertaining to Tawheed historically your sect had undergone changes & evolutions it's never had a stable ideological foundation. 

As said earlier your notable companions of Imam Zayd bin Ali (عليه السلام) believed in takfir on Abu bakr & Umar some also included Uthman others disagreed. 

So what you believe today is not consistent with your founding father's beliefs at any given time in history. 

I will study your school of thought more deeply I haven't even got hold of your books yet.

So the very accusations you have been levelling against the ithnasheri are actually applicable to your own sect but amplified many times over .

When I have studied your sect a little I am open to more detailed debate Inshallah. 

2 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Wa'alaykom As-Salam Wa'Rahmatullah 

We do believe in their infallibility, the people of the cloak do not err in judgement when it comes to matters of the religion, their testimony is accepted as one and what they say is an obligation for us to follow. They cannot possibly commit any of the major sins, they are completely infallible in that regard, as for minor sins and errancies, or possibly procrastinating they can commit such acts. We see Prophets in the Quran committing minor sins and asking forgiveness from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) therefore it is reasonable to say that the members of the cloak (aside from the Prophet) who are less in status than the Prophets of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) can commit those acts as well. Of course, it isn't to say that they do, rather it is to postulate the possibility.

Lets have some respect when inquiring?

We can prove it from Sunni sources quite succinctly, I don't know why you'd want to go that route since you are a twelver? 

You mean one solitary report that contradicts itself in the matn, contradicts its presupposition when mentioning Abu Bakr being the first of the twelve in other chains, and never once used to prove the Imamate of your Imams before the occultation? 

This is you reading your own presumptions of infallibility and purification into the verse, one needs to first objectively understand the meaning of رجس 

Of course you would think that, it is baseless unless you demonstrate it. 

The purpose of Imamate for you is to guide and the twelfth Imam fundamentally does not guide, I don't think you can genuinely come that conclusion logically. 

No, Imamate does not end, it is very active. However, only when necessary, when it comes to political governing and uprising. Unlike your presupposition that Imamate is to just guide in matters of religion, religion is clear we need those knowledgeable in it to implement it. Twelvers unfortunately have halted the Shariah for over 1000 years! Even the Friday prayer is not obligatory, Subhanallah. Your Imamate is relative and nothing more. That is why you had great people like Sayyid Khomeini establish a government that is fundamentally rooted in a Zaydi type model! You will continue to evolve and change.

Yes, many sects and ideologies emerged and the only one that stayed consistent, that didn't have to evolve into an Usooli school, that didn't need to go through rigorous reinterpretations is the Zaydi school. The school the the Imams and their sons all followed for the first 3-5 centuries (A.H)!

But it is wise to say that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) obliges us to follow an Imam without a Hadith that designates him, with that a source to his name, without evidence of his guidance, and without means to reach him? And above that we will be thrown into hellfire, because we couldn't wrap our heads around this illogical request, Exalted is the Most Merciful above all that which you ascribe to Him!

Interpretation in what? As you know matters of Usool al-deen are stable and intact until the day of Judgement, therefore, what remains is principal matters of jurisprudence, I ask if the interpretation is not complete what makes you say this model of deriving rulings utilized by the scholars today, which does not resemble the model used in the past, is the correct means to interpret the religion? Again, you are back to fairytale land where the Imam has this precise means to go to the most infinitesimal detail and give a ruling from there, believe me that is amazing, but you need to understand that the world and especially the Shariah does not revolve around idealistic fairytales when it comes to Imamate and if your scholars followed with your reasoning you guys would be extinct. 

Let me make something clear.

There is not, nor will you ever find a Hadith which mentions 12 Imams by name, or by number at that, which isn't particular to the works of those compilers in the post-occultation period. The 12 Caliph Sunni Solitary Hadith (that does not exist in Zaydi works) is an Abbasid forgery used to counter the revolts of the Zaidiyyah. 

You are asking about Zaydi Imamate, because you don't know about it, and at the same time you are refuting it on false premises? 

I really don't know what to say to this brother, I can give you a list of at least 50 on the top of my head.

Again, you don't know anything about Zaydi Imamate and while inquiring you are somehow refuting it, Mashallah! Your intentions to learn are very clear :) 

Brother, at this point I don't want to assume you are trolling, but I can't take this seriously.

Exactly

I agree

No, he doesn't  

refer to:

 

Mashallah, his guidance is found between scholars/jurists who can't seem to reach a consensus of the very fundamental tenants of your Imamate and who are constantly differing in matters of principality.

We are obedient to the Imam in his occultation the guidance he left us we refer to the scholars who may differ on minor issues they do not differ on Usool. 

You have provided no evidence Yannabi al mavadah chapter 76 names all the Imams it's Sunni book. There numerous hadith that state the number 12 from Sunni works. 

The Sunnis had no reason to have these reports in their books as they don't believe in the occultation. I know your next accusation is going to be Abbasid forgery another nonsensical argument. 

It's very unfortunate that you act as if the latter Imams were free to act guide as they wished . This again is illogical assumption because your demands for a designation have already been proven through the numerous hadith in the Sunni works that mentioned 12 Imams.

I noticed in numerous threads you refuse to acknowledge the Abbasids were looking for the 12th Imam son Imam Hasan Askri (عليه السلام). 

Suffice is to say you have no evidence that the Divine Immamat ended with Hussain (عليه السلام) in 61 AH neither from Quran neither from Sunni sources. 

You very cleverly sugar coat the fact your notion of faulty infallibility is unintelligible. 

You say the Divine Imam can forget & commit minor sins so the possibility is always there for forgetfulness and mistakes irrelevant of how you present it.

So the Divine leader is hampered in carrying out his God given duty. Either there is infallibility or there isn't very simple in your concept of Immamat nothing stops the Divine leader from the possibility of sin minor/ major exists. 

So these illogical concepts and abrupt end to Imammat cannot be attributed to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) he would never leave the Ummah in disarray. This is precisely our argument against Sunnis and you agree with us on this.

Later in your history your sect does precisely what it accused the Sunni sect of doing namely leaving the Ummah in disarray with the abrupt and inconclusive end to Imammat at 61 AH.

We do not attribute these illogical actions to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) far above all this is Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) whose promise was fulfilled so his servants have no argument against him on Yaum al qiyamah. 

Wasalam 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I have some other questions:

1- What are your views concerning the graves/mausoleums/resting places of the Prophets, Imams and companions ? Is it similar to the 12er view where one can decorate them, respect them, do ziyarat, kiss them ? Or is it more Salafi where it's all bid'ah and doing so would be considered shirk ? Do you believe that you'll get some kind of rewards and hasanat if you visit their graves in Medina, Kadhimiyya, Samarra and Mashad ?

2- What are your opinions regarding our (12er) Imams that you don't consider them to be Imams ? Do you view them with high regards and respect them, the same way we do with Zaid (رضي الله عنه) for example ? Do you just see them as scholars ? Or do you simply consider them to be normal sayyed Muslims ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Salam Akhi, with due respect Zaidi divine Imamat ends with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) this makes no sense 

Wasalam ok I've found alot in this forum 12er imposing an aqeeda upon Zaidi.

So I'll just clarify. 1st aqeeda can not be blind following every individual must be firm on the fundamentals they understand so it can vary.

But when addressing a group/sect you need to standardise the aqeeda. The best way to do this is quote from an aqeeda book of a classic scholar of that sect. Eg sheikh Sadooq (12er)

So if you go to fundamentals of religion by Imam Hadi bin Hussain bin Qasim.

He ends the obligatory fundamentals at Imam Ali.

He then has a paragraph on the differing views of Imamat.

As for Imam Hassan and Hussain there is a hadith of explicit designation but that is limited to Shia text. I don't believe it's included in Sunni. Either way Imam Hassan and Hussain come under the general rules of Zaidi Imamat.

So it can be seen as a secondary branch of aqeeda. If you insist on including it.

Imam Hadi is clear about the fundamentals which I just stated.

As for what makes sense to you. I don't really care.

I approach things from and evidence point of view. And the evidence for Zaidi aqeeda is numerous,strong ,accessible and requires minimal interpretation.

Edited by Ali bin Hussein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

1- What are your views concerning the graves/mausoleums/resting places of the Prophets, Imams and companions ? Is it similar to the 12er view where one can decorate them, respect them, do ziyarat, kiss them ? Or is it more Salafi where it's all bid'ah and doing so would be considered shirk ? Do you believe that you'll get some kind of rewards and hasanat if you visit their graves in Medina, Kadhimiyya, Samarra and Mashad ?

It’s similar to moderate twelverism, definitely not like the Salafis. 

1 hour ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

2- What are your opinions regarding our (12er) Imams that you don't consider them to be Imams ? Do you view them with high regards and respect them, the same way we do with Zaid (رضي الله عنه) for example ? Do you just see them as scholars ? Or do you simply consider them to be normal sayyed Muslims ?

We highly revere them, we believe that they were all Zaidiyyah. The point is the 11 Imams and the Zaydi imams (their sons and cousins) were all on one path! We take Hadiths from practically all of them علیهم السلام 

If you look through our Hadith corpus you would find that many of our narrations go back to them! So to answer your question, we don’t revere them as much as you do with Imam Zayd, we revere them more than that! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
27 minutes ago, Ali bin Hussein said:

Wasalam ok I've found alot in this forum 12er imposing an aqeeda upon Zaidi.

So I'll just clarify. 1st aqeeda can not be blind following every individual must be firm on the fundamentals they understand so it can vary.

But when addressing a group/sect you need to standardise the aqeeda. The best way to do this is quote from an aqeeda book of a classic scholar of that sect. Eg sheikh Sadooq (12er)

So if you go to fundamentals of religion by Imam Hadi bin Hussain bin Qasim.

He ends the obligatory fundamentals at Imam Ali.

He then has a paragraph on the differing views of Imamat.

As for Imam Hassan and Hussain there is a hadith of explicit designation but that is limited to Shia text. I don't believe it's included in Sunni. Either way Imam Hassan and Hussain come under the general rules of Zaidi Imamat.

So it can be seen as a secondary branch of aqeeda. If you insist on including it.

Imam Hadi is clear about the fundamentals which I just stated.

As for what makes sense to you. I don't really care.

I approach things from and evidence point of view. And the evidence for Zaidi aqeeda is numerous,strong ,accessible and requires minimal interpretation.

Exactly that there is no proof for designation for Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) or Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) from your fundamentals because it ends at Imam Ali (عليه السلام).

So you can't prove neither designation nor end of Immamat from Sunni sources.

But your happily trying to use the same arguments on this platform against ithnasheri believers by stating names are not mentioned, Abbasid forgery etc.

The excuses and reasons you state against the plethora of Sunni hadith that mention 12 Imams are contradictory because you don't apply the same logic to your own creed & theory.

You cannot provide a single hadith from ithnasheri or Sunni sources stating that Divine Immamat ended with Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) in 61 AH.

That is not evidence based at all it's a contradiction all your really doing is trying to turn the discussion into a polemic argument based on hadiths Ilm ul Rijal is not a infallible theory & this is not a academic discussion based on a proven scientific theory. 

Furthermore the Irony is within your own sect there are Jarudiya , Batariya , Salmiya nasriya.  

Your school of thought intially took jurisprudence from Imam Baqir and Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) . Then later you created a Madhab based on similar beliefs to Sunni madabh of Abu Hanifa. 

Historically your founding fathers beliefs have been different prime example are the Jarudiya who cursed Abu Bakr & Umar & the Salmiyah who included Uthman. 

Today your beliefs are different to the original Zaidi. Your school of thought have held pro & anti Ibadhi/ Mutazilite positions historically so clearly your sect has evolved to what it is now.

So your Usool ideologies have changed again and again something that Zaidi accuse twelvers of another contradiction. 

Wasalam 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

your sect has a history of evolution. 

These have nothing to do with our authentic sect, as you would agree the 500 sects in firaq Al-Shia have nothing to do with you. 

When it comes to evolution I was referring to internal evolution, otherwise you’re in the same boat that you’re accusing me of! 

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

then there was a later time where  under Hanfiyah influence you created your own Madhab.

Another misconception from Wikipedia, Abu Hanifa studied under Imam Zayd! 

لولا السنتان لهلك النعمان 

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Historically there was a time when Zayidah was pro Ibadhi ,Mutazilite then later became anti Ibadhi Mutazilite

I would love a source for this 

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

Some of you still believe the Quran is created

We all believe the Quran is created this is a matter of consensus :) I’ll give it to you brother out of all the dubious accusations I have heard this one has got to be at the top! 

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

your notable companions

Those who attributed sayings and beliefs to Ziyad Ibn Al’Mundhir do not reflect his position. Didn’t the Imams themselves say in your own works that there are those who attribute false saying to them?

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

So what you believe today is not consistent with your founding father's beliefs at any given time in history. 

You have unequivocally demonstrated that you have no idea what the Zaidiyyah believe. 

3 hours ago, Ultimate truth said:

I will study your school of thought more deeply I haven't even got hold of your books yet.

I can’t believe you had the audacity to make all those accusations and follow through with this statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Zaidism said:

I really don't know what to say to this brother, I can give you a list of at least 50 on the top of my head

Brother do you foresee any zaydi imams rising in the future? I read some non Muslim website claim some zaidi ulama abolished Imamate, but I took it with a grain of salt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As I said it is historically correct the zaidism of today has evolved to what it is at different times in history their Ideological positions kept changing.

  Abu Hanifa studied under Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام). even Sunni don't dispute this . The fiqh of Zaidiya is very similar to the Qiyas practice of Abu Hanifa unless another evolution has taken place.

The original Zaydiya believed the Quran was not created they were also determinists in theology. It was effusion of Batriya a moderate strand & Jarudiya a extremist strand within the Shia  traditionalists of Kufa.

Eventually the Jarudiya were the dominant force the Jarudiya rejected the first 3 caliphs. 

They condemned the majority of the companions for failing to uphold the rights of Imam Ali (عليه السلام).  The Batariya on the other hand accepted the first 3 caliphs as legitimate and didn't accept the Immmat of Imam Baqir (عليه السلام).

This is why this soft stance exists within Zaiiydayah towards the first three caliphs because another evolution took place later in their history. 

Then came the Talbiyah in the 10th century who extended the concept of Immah to the descendants of Abu Talib (عليه السلام). In contradiction of the early stance of Zaydiya that Immamat belongs in lineage of Hassani& Hussaini lineage. 

Their were also different variants of Zaydiya such as Nasriya & Salimiyah not sure if they still exist.

So as you can see Zaidis cannot provide any Independent hadiths neither from Ithnasheri or Sunni sources for designation of Immamat for Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) & Imam Hassan (عليه السلام). Neither can they provide any hadith for the end to Divine Immamat at 61AH following Martyrdom of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام). 

The whole theology just kept evolving to what it is today. 

Wasalam 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

* My apologies typo of course they would be able to prove designation of Imam Hasan & Hussain (عليه السلام). from ithnasheri sources but not from Sunni sources but they cannot prove Immamat concluded with at 61AH from ithnasheri or Sunni sources . Their own fundamentals stop at Imam Ali (عليه السلام) Immamat.  My apologies for the mistake. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

We do believe in their infallibility, the people of the cloak do not err in judgement when it comes to matters of the religion, their testimony is accepted as one and what they say is an obligation for us to follow. They cannot possibly commit any of the major sins, they are completely infallible in that regard, as for minor sins and errancies, or possibly procrastinating they can commit such acts. We see Prophets in the Quran committing minor sins and asking forgiveness from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) therefore it is reasonable to say that the members of the cloak (aside from the Prophet) who are less in status than the Prophets of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) can commit those acts as well. Of course, it isn't to say that they do, rather it is to postulate the possibility.

I am not a learned person, average layman. However, reading all the arguments over the years and understanding the differences. I have come to believe, that the Proper Understanding of this concept can be a very good start. 

Otherwise, Everything Else we discuss will Not help us, as the base case is flawed. 

1) Man like us- Mailman- Infallible in delivery of the "Message"(?) . Book is sufficient/He died. 

2) Man like us in Physical form( Apparent/Visual), the Hidden/Inner (Light sent to us).  - Word of Allah(عزّ وجلّ) and the Representative of Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Both Infallible, Book is Thru Him and his actions understood. Light upon Light till the end of time.  Divine Guidance till the end of time. Mercy to the Creation(s)/World/(s). 

Every Concept (Leadership/Governance/....) will be different based on 1) or 2). 

There are two groups of Muslims one belonging to 1) and second belonging to 2) . At this level - of discussion so discussing  other concepts/fiqh is never going to solve anything. or adopting a name like sunni,shia , wahabi,quranist at this level is meaningless- there are two groups. 1) and 2). 

This is the ultimate Test of Believers. Angles or Iblis? where do you belong?

-----

كَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا فِيكُمْ رَسُولًا مِنْكُمْ يَتْلُو عَلَيْكُمْ آيَاتِنَا وَيُزَكِّيكُمْ وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَيُعَلِّمُكُمْ مَا لَمْ تَكُونُوا تَعْلَمُونَ {151}

[Shakir 2:151] Even as We have sent among you a Messenger from among you who recites to you Our communications and purifies you and teaches you the Book and the wisdom and teaches you that which you did not know.
[Pickthal 2:151] Even as We have sent unto you a messenger from among you, who reciteth unto you Our revelations and causeth you to grow, and teacheth you the Scripture and wisdom, and teacheth you that which ye knew not.
[Yusufali 2:151] A similar (favour have ye already received) in that We have sent among you a Messenger of your own, rehearsing to you Our Signs, and sanctifying you, and instructing you in Scripture and Wisdom, and in new knowledge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, MexicanVato said:

Brother do you foresee any zaydi imams rising in the future? I read some non Muslim website claim some zaidi ulama abolished Imamate, but I took it with a grain of salt. 

Thank you for asking brother, also great to see you back on the forum! Zaydi Imamate is here to stay until the day of judgement, as for an Imam rising one can only speculate.

However, irrespective of the time, place, era the scholars have an idea of who the Imam would be if he were to call to himself. 

And just to highlight to the readers, the Imam is pretty much going to be similar to Sayyid Khamenei in terms of leadership, etc. I cannot stress the importance of viewing Zaydi Imams as Wali Faqihs, as opposed to comparing them to an infallible perfect Imam who has the knowledge of the unseen (this of course exists only theoretically). 

Edited by Hameedeh
typo edited by request
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...