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

The sons of the Imams were Zaydis

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Within this post I will seek to demonstrate the undeniable fact that the sons of the Imams were Zaydis. In doing so I will be pointing to the consistent narrative the Zaydi school holds to, which maintains that the Imams of the twelver school and the Imams of the Zaydi school were in reality upon one creed, and as much as one would like to deny this, I pray that this demonstration can be clear in elucidating the Zaydi claim. This is by no means a comprehensive list, rather a point towards a bigger project that hopes to draw a dichotomy between the 'reliable' transmitters of the twelver creed, wherein one will come to see that those who are considered to be of the closest companions of the Imams occupied very strong relations with the Abbasid Caliphs, and the Abbasid government. Coincidentally those near kin of the Imams were considered to be liars, power-seekers, and fabricators. In order to look at matters objectively we ought to step back and look at things through a historians perspective, eliminating any biases we may have and examine both narratives, as both schools have traditions that vindicate their claims. For example, the twelvers have reports which show the Imams considered Zaydis to be Nawasib! Whereas, the Zaydis have reports where the great Imams of 'ilm (knowledge) such as Imam Baqir, Sadiq, Kadhim, and Jawad gave their utmost support to the Zaidiyyah - this Insha'Allah will be shared as well to further pronounce the points that are sought to be made Insha'Allah.

What I will seek to demonstrate is that The sons of Imam Sadiq were Zaydis, the sons of Imam Kadhim were Zaydis, as well as provide indications that the Imams themselves were Zaydis. Furthermore, I will present at the end a reading into those who claim to transmit the sayings of the Imams, and how they indeed occupied very close relations to the Abbasid tyrants. 

:bismillah:

O you who believe! Protect yourselves and your families from a Fire, whose fuel is people and stones. Over it are angels, fierce and powerful. They never disobey God in anything He commands them, and they carry out whatever they are commanded. {Al-Tahreem: 6]

Ja'far Al-Sadiq (sons)
 

Abdullah Al Aftah (son of Ja'far bin Muhammad Al-Sadiq)

Sheikh Hassan Al-Amin: And what is mind boggling! Two of the sons of Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq moved towards the Zaydiyyah, and they are: Muhammad abd Abdullah

Source: Mustadrak 'Ayan Al-Shia, 1/71

قال الشيخ حسن الأمين : ((والأغرَب! مِن أنّ اثنين مِن أولادِ الإمَام جَعفَر بن محمّدٍ نفسَه مَالا إلى الزيدية، وهُمَا: عَبد الله، ومحمّد، خرَج الأول مَع النّفس الزكيّة وكَان مُتّهمًا بالخِلاف عَلى أبيه ودَعَا إلى نفسِه مِن بَعدِه، وخَالط الحشويّة فيمَا يُقال، ولَه أتباعٌ يُعرفُون بالفطحيّة، وخَرج الثاني على المأمُون بمكة سَنة (199هـ) وأيّدتهُ الزيدية)) [مستدركات أعيان الشيعة:1/71] 

 

Muhammad (son of Ja'far bin Muhammad Al-Sadiq)

Al Khoei says: The faith of this man has not been established, let alone him being considered reliable, and nothing (good) has reached us in his regard, other than the praise he received from Al-Mufid. Which states that he was generous and brave, and this does not effect our judgement.

Source: [The rijaal of Al-Khoei 16/176]

قال السيد الخوئي يتكلّم عن الإمام محمد بن جَعفَر (ع) : ((فإنه لم يثبت إيمان هذا الرجل، فضلاً عن وثاقته، ولم يرد فيه مدح غير ما ذكره المفيد – قدس سره- من أنه كان سخياً شجاعاً، ولا أثر لهذا المدح فيما نحن بصدده)) [معجم رجال الحديث:16/176]

Al-Mufid said in his regard: He takes the position of the Zaydis when it comes to revolting... and the Zaidiyyah followed him

Source: Al Irshad 2/212

وقال عنه الشيخ المفيد : ((ويرى رأي الزيدية في الخروج بالسيف ،…، واتبعته الزيدية)) [الإرشاد:2/212]  

(Notable mention)
Imam Hussein (son of Zayd, son Ali Zayn al-abideen)

This great Imam was young when his brave father Imam Zayd ((عليه السلام)) was martyred, he was the 'ربيب' of Imam Sadiq, meaning that Imam Sadiq raised him!

الحسين بن زيد بن علي

حدثني علي بن العباس، قال: حدثني أحمد بن حازم، قال: حدثنا محول بن إبراهيم، قال:

شهد الحسين بن زيد حرب محمد وإبراهيم بني عبد الله بن الحسن بن الحسن ثم توارى. وكان مقيما في منزل جعفر بن محمد. وكان جعفر ربّاه، ونشأ في حجره منذ قتل أبوه، وأخذ عنه علما كثيرا. فلما لم يذكر فيمن طلب ظهر لمن يأنس به من أهله وإخوانه.

Source: https://al-maktaba.org/book/12404/327

Al Hussein son of Zayd was present during the revolutions of Muhammad and Ibrahim (the Zaydi Imams) the sons of Abdullah son of Al Hassan, son of Al Hassan. And he was residing in the home of Ja'far son of Muhammad, and Ja'far raised him, and he - Al Hussein son of Zayd - was raised in the home of Al-Sadiq ever since the martyrdom of his father, and he took a great deal of knowledge from him.

I ask, does anyone dare accuse Imam Al-Sadiq of not raising his brave sons right?! Does anyone doubt that the sons of Imam Sadiq all supported the revolts of their kindred who the twelvers speak ill of? 

Does anyone doubt that Imam Sadiq himself supported these revolts!

We have read what the twelver scholars had to say about Imam Abdullah, now let us see what Imam Sadiq has to say about him. 

فإِنّا واللهِ لا نَدَعُكَ ـ وأنتَ شيخُنا ـ ونبايع ابنَكَ فَي هذا الأمرِ

'By Allah, we will not leave you alone in this matter - and you are our grand Sheikh - and we will pledge allegiance to your son Muhammad Al'Nafs Al'Zakiyyah

Source: http://lib.eshia.ir/27035/2/192/"ونبايع"?fbclid=IwAR3NvQudInVDKvFcSac8pwwM7mGqtNHQ8v7jdCagBPaQCBTK1ciwqEXRmlY

This Imam is considered unreliable by the twelver school, to the point where he is even condemned, this of course is not surprising when it comes to the twelver traditions; condemning the near kin of the Ahlulbayt, and vindicating those who occupy very questionable positions. Refer to volume 11, page 175 of Al-Khoei's Rijaal to see the Jarh of this great personality. Whose mother is Fatema daughter of Imam Hussein, and whose father is Al Hassan son of Imam Hassan. One would also question why this great Imam is condemned, while someone who does Tajseem like the two Hishams are vindicated, an indication of this inconsistency is the argument that Ja'far Subhani gives towards Hisham, saying 'this is a man who grew up in the lap of Imam Sadiq!'

Source:

(ويتلوه في البطلان ما نسبه إلى هشام بن حكم من الآراء كالتشبيه وغيره ، فإن هذه الآراء ممّا يستحيل أن ينتحل بها تلميذ الإمام الصادق عليه‌السلام الذي تربّى في أحضانه)) [كليات في علم الرجال:418] .


One would wonder why the same argument cannot be presented towards Imam Abdullah, as Al Kadhim Al Zaydi put it, for he grew up in the laps of those who were nearest to the flesh of Imam Hassan and Hussein. Furthermore, it is quite interesting to say that someone who grew up in the laps of Imam Sadiq cannot possibly be condemned, and then going on to condemn the very sons of Imam Sadiq! Who are these sons you may ask, well they are some of the Zaydi Imams.

When researching this matter, one would conclude that indeed this took place, and the rijaal within the sanad are Imammiyah as well. However, there is an issue that one may point out - although it takes nothing from the point being made, it is nonetheless good to nip it in the bud. The tradition here in Maqatil Al Talibiyeen seems to paint the picture that Imam Abdullah would say his son is the Mahdi, and Imam Jafar would say that this is not the matter, wherein we see Imam Abdullah telling Imam Jafar that he is envious of him. Wherein Imam Jafar states that he is not against the revolution of Imam Muhammad Al NafsZakiyyah, rather he wishes to highlight that the belief of him being the Mahdi is incorrect, and other then that they have his full support wherein Imam Sadiq send his sons Musa Al-Kadhim, and Abdullah to fight alongside Al NafsZakiyyah and he pardons himself, due to his old age.

The idea that Imam Abdullah believed his son was the Mahdi is false, and the claim within the matn of the report that he told his nephew Imam Sadiq that he is envious is also a false claim, and I will explain why.

The rijaal of the sanad as mentioned are Imammiyah, and as you all may know there is a lot of adding into the text that occurs. Furthermore, Al Mufid in Al-Irshad mentions Imam Sadiq referring to Imam Muhammad, and he makes a very critical statement. He does not say his uncle Imam Abdullah believes his son is the Mahdi, he says some people have been circulating a rumor that he is the Mahdi - due to his name, the birthmark, etc.

قالَ أَبو الفرج : وحدّثَني عليُّ بنُ العبّاسِ المَقانعيّ قالَ : أَخبرَنا بكّارُ بنُ أَحمدَ قالَ : حدّثَنا حسنُ بنُ حسينٍ [١] عن (عَنْبَسَة بن بجادٍ ) [٢] العابدِ قالَ : كانَ جعفرُ بنُ محمّدٍ 8 إِذا رأَى محمّدَ بنَ عبداللهِ ابن حسنٍ تَغَرْ غَرَتْ عيناه ، ثمّ يقولُ : «بنفسي هو ، إِنّ النّاسَ لَيقولونَ فيه ، وإِنّه لَمقتولٌ ، ليسَ هو في كتابِ عليٍّ من خلفاءِ هذه الأمّةِ»

Imam Sadiq here is stating that the people are saying he is the Mahdi. 

http://lib.eshia.ir/27035/2/193 - This Hadith is authentic by the standards of Al-Mufid

Furthermore, if one tries to say that this clearly indicates the knowledge of the unseen of Imam Sadiq we would like to redirect them to the sermon of Imam Ali where he mentions the Mongols, and when asked if this is knowledge of the unseen he responds that it is not the case, rather it is that which the Prophet had taught him. Therefore, this information that Imam Sadiq has is that which has been recorded in كتابِ عليٍّ the book of Ali, and as mentioned the people were circulating all kinds of nonsense and attributing it to the Ahlulbayt. We see Imam Sadiq ((عليه السلام)) stating in Rijaal Kishi:


النّاس أولِعُوا بالكَذب عَلينا ، إنّ الله افترض عليهم لا يريد منهم غَيرَه ، وإنّي أحَدّثُ أحَدَهُم بالحَديث فَلا يَخرُج مِنْ عِندي حتى يتأوّلَه عَلى غَير تأويله، وذلك أنّهم لا يطلبون بحديثنا وبِحُبّنا مَا عند الله وإنّما يَطلبون به الدنيا

[رجال الكشي:1/347] 

The people have been extravagant in attributing lies to us! All I want is that which Allah has made obligatory upon them; whenever I narrate a tradition to one of them, they only leave my vicinity having completely fabricated what I have shared with them - giving their own Ta’wil (interpretation) and that is because they don’t want from our traditions and our care what is found with Allah, rather they want this worldly life. [Al Kishi: 1/347]

This is simply to break any weak narrative that may be painted against the relationship between Imam Abdullah and Imam Sadiq, and a reminder to the reader that regardless of what narrative an individual takes: The support of Imam Sadiq to the Zaydi revolts is undeniable, as well as his support to the great Imam Abdullah who the twelver school slanders. Furthermore, it has been established through the testimony of the twelver school that the sons of Imam Sadiq were Zaidiyyah.

Musa Al-Kadhim

[ذكر من عرف ممن خرج مع محمد بن عبد الله] - Those whom revolted alongside Muhammad Al'Nafs Az-Zakkiyah

ابن الحسن من أهل العلم، ونقلة الآثار ومن رأى الخروج معه وأفتى الناس حدّثني علي بن العباس المقانعي، أنبأنا بكار بن أحمد بن اليسع، قال:

حدّثنا الحسن بن الحسين، عن الحسين بن زيد، قال:

شهد مع محمد بن عبد الله بن الحسن من ولد الحسن أربعة: أنا وأخي عيسى، وموسى وعبد الله ابنا جعفر بن محمد -

Al Hussein son of Zayd - the one we mentioned to be raised in the lap of Imam Sadiq - states that those who rose with Muhammad were:

I, my brother 'isa (another Imam of the Zaidiyyah), Musa, and Abullah sons of Ja'far. 

Source: https://al-maktaba.org/book/12404/240

Our sources have more to relay about the participation of Imam Kadhim, i.e he was 17 when he fought, and he was able to kill the first of the opponents, etc. But this should suffice to highlight the participation of Imam Kadhim in the Zaydi revolt, we will now highlight his sons, who are also Zaydis. 

Ahmed (son of Musa Al-Kadhim)

روى الكشّي ، بإسناده ، حدّثني محمّد بن أحمد بن أسيد، قَال:  فلمّا خَرجَ أبو السَّرايَا [قائدُ جيشِ الإمام محمد بن إبراهيم] ، خرَج أحمَد ابن أبي الحَسن -عليه السّلام- مَعَهُ؛

Al Kishi narrates with his chain: When Abu Al Sarayah - the commander of the army of the [Zaydi] Imam Muhammad son Ibrahim (son of Al Hassan, son of Al Hassan), Ahmed son of Abu Al Hassan revolted with him. 

Source: Rijaal Al-Kishi: 2/770

Zayd (son of Musa Al-Kadhim)

This great son of Imam Kadhim should require no source, for him being a Zaydi is clearer than the son, and he is condemned in twelver sources. I will nonetheless mention what is said about him.

 وقال الصدوق في العيون حدّثنا أبو الخير عليّ بن أحمد النسّابة عن مشايخه أنّ زيد بن موسى كان ينادمُ المنتصر وكان في لسانه فضلٌ وكان زيديّاً 

Al-Sadooq mentions in Al'ayoon: Zayd used to speak against Al'Muntasir, and within his words were truth, and he was a Zaydi

Muhammad Al-Hadi

The son of Al-Hadi (Ja'far) requires no introduction, as the twelver school calls him Ja'far the liar, to us he is known as Ja'far the purified! He rose after the death of his brother Al-Hassan Al'Askari ((عليه السلام)). Free are these blessed sons of Al-Zahra from your slander. The son of Ja'far Al Zaki, son of Al-Hadi, who is known as Idrees is also known to be a zaydi.

These are a few examples out of many more which I pray can be brought to light in the future over the oneness of the Ahlulbayt.

I will now share a post that highlights those who the twelvers praise and take their creed from, after having condemned some of these great personalities from the pure progeny. As I mentioned, this is by no means a comprehensive list, there are other sons of the aforementioned Imams such as Isma'il son of Musa Al-Kadhim that I did not mention, due to the ambiguity of the source. I will elucidate over him - with the aid of Allah - after I can present a clear narrative.

The Abbasid State and the Imamiyyah

The evidence for the close association of the Imamis with the Abbasids are found in their own Rijali work and they highlight the position held by their men. We highlight some of the names:-

Hisham bin Al-Hakam

He was amongst the Ashab Al-Ijma and Salaf of the Imamis, he was one of the servant of Yahya bin Khalid Al-Barmaki then he became one of the inner-circle (Khawas) of Harun Al-Abbasi. Mentioned in Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith by Sayyed Al-Khoei. He was their star and brightest Imami scholar who allegedly learnt directly from Imam Ja’far Al-Sadiq (ع).

Isa bin Rawdha 

Al-Najashi said he was the bodyguard of Al-Mansur, a great Mutakalim, he has a book on Imamat, some of their companions (Imamis) said to have seen this book. They have read in some of the books that when Al-Mansur is doubtful (regarding something) he would call upon Isa bin Rawdha who was amongst his Mawla. [Rijal Al-Najashi-294]
This was also narrated by Abdul Husayn Al-Shubastari in Al-Faiq Fi Al-Ashab Imam Al-Sadiq]

It is said by Sayyed Hasan Al-Sadr that he was amongst the Tabieen, Mutaqadin in the area of Kalam and Usul Al-Madhab he was mentioned amongst the earliest authors who established Shiism [Taklimat Amal Al-Aamal: 182/4] 

He was an influential man during the time of Al-Mansur who founded the city of Madinah Al-Salam (ie Baghdad). He was mentioned in the book Tarikh Al-Baghdad written by Ahmad bin Abi Tahir. 

Abbas Iqbal Ashtayani said he was amongst the earliest authors in the matter of Imamah amongst the Imami Mutakalimun

Muhammad bin Ismail bin Yazi’.


He is amongst the narrators of the Principle books of the Imamis. Sheikh Al-Tusi mentioned in Al-Fahrist, Al-Najashi said he was the Mawla (slave) of Abu Mansur, he was amongst the Thiqat, he has many deeds.

Yaqtin bin Musa 


He was with the Abbasid during the battle against Imam Al-Husayn bin Ali Al-Fakhi (ع) (Kitab Akbar Fakh). 

Sheikh Al-Tusi said regarding him: He never shrugged off from his duty towards Al-Saffah, Al-Mansur and he was also a Shii and also his son (Al-Fahrist:155), his son Ali was also close to the ministers of the Abbasids. 

Al-Najashi said it was narrated from Imam Al-Saddiq, that letters were sent from him at that time he was the Wali of Al-Ahwaz before Al-Mansur [Rijal Al-Najashi:213]

Abdullah bin Sinan 

Al-Najashi said he was the treasurer of Al-Mansur, Al-Mahdi, Al-Hadi and Al-Rashid, a Kufi, trustworthy, from their great Companions (Imamis). He has a book called Salat Al-Kabir in it all the Halal and Haram (ie laws) are found [Rijal Al-Najashi:214]

Al-Barqi said he is from the Mawla of Bani Abbas, was the minister of Al-Mahdi, Musa and Harun [Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith: 5/32]

Daud bin Ali Al-Abidi

Sheikh Al-Tusi said he was from the companions of Al-Mahdi [Rijal Al-Tusi:375]

Ali bin Yaqtin bin Musa


He like his father was a companion of Al-Saffah, Abi Ja’far and took part in the battle of Fakh with the Abbasids. 

Sheikh Al-Tussi said he was Thiqat, great status in the Imami school, when he died, his Janazah prayers was led by the crown Prince Muhammad bin Al-Rashid [Al-Fahrist:154] 

His brother Ubayd bin Yaqtin bin Musa was the killer of the Salaf of the Itrah Sulayman bin Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin Ali (ع). [Akhbar Al-Fakh]. 

We could see how close the Early Imami scholars were with the Abbasid State. One of the famous families who represented Imamis were the Nawbakht family, they occupied high positions in the Abbasid court also documented in their own books. One of the four Deputies of the Hidden Twelve Imams was Al-Husayn Ibn Al-Ruh Al-Nawbakhti, from the Nawbakhti family. There are a lot more examples of their direct participation in the Abbasid Government. 

The Abbasids did not consider them as opponents because they not only failed to support any of the sons of their 12 Imams but also led armies to wage war against them for the Abbasids and they call themselves Shias of Imam Ali.

Harun Al-Abbasi said: 
والله ما بيني وبين الإمامية خلاف فلئن قام إمامهم على الصفة التي ذكروا لأكونن أول من تبعه، وما عدوي وعدو آبائي إلا هؤلاء الزيدية الذين كلما خرج من هؤلاء القوم خارج أصلتوا أسيافهم بين يديه، وتغسلوا وتحنطوا يطلبون الجنة)) [الشافي]

By Allah I have no difference (ikhtilaf) with the Imamiyyah, when their Imams rise with the attributes they mention, I will be the first to follow, and my enemy and the enemy of my ancestors are those Zaydis, whenever someone from amongst them do khuruj, they straighten (or raise) their swords  between their arms, and they wash and embalm with it and they seek Jannah
[Narrated by Imam Abdullah bin Hamza in Al-Shafi]

Abbasid state and Imammiyah quote courtesy of:

 https://www.facebook.com/The-Zaydi-Community-281562272636558/?__cft__[0]=AZVQvQzXbYdE9ziEk5_whkYc6bkNcUbP_t_ENitbEpj_UmDYelc3-0rgV2V6wEBEpiTLCMggpZZEvoIE513Gj3IaBnt6n5ilVzbojT6tf4a1zOWw1iihFN9pfdHc6_FLEKioxLbjklsI2u77l8_GQlNTVD-LCmFTxOjJqFVw3uo-IQ&__tn__=-UC%2CP-y-R

[Mod Note: tag removed]

لِّيَهْلِكَ مَنْ هَلَكَ عَنۢ بَيِّنَةٍۢ وَيَحْيَىٰ مَنْ حَىَّ عَنۢ بَيِّنَةٍۢ

Edited by Hameedeh
Member request to edit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Points mentioned in the video:

  • Affirmed that Zayd son of Musa is Zaydi
  • Affirmed that the brother of Imam Ridha (from his mother) is Zaydi 
  • Affirmed that Muhammad son of Ja'far is Zaydi
  • Affirmed that the other sons of Imam Sadiq were not twelvers, he states that they became waqefyah, but that is incorrect, as displayed they were Zaydis.

Again, ponder deeply over this verse:

يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ قُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَهْلِيكُمْ نَارًا وَقُودُهَا ٱلنَّاسُ وَٱلْحِجَارَةُ عَلَيْهَا مَلَٰٓئِكَةٌ غِلَاظٌ شِدَادٌ لَّا يَعْصُونَ ٱللَّهَ مَآ أَمَرَهُمْ وَيَفْعَلُونَ مَا يُؤْمَرُونَ


O you who have believed, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones, over which are [appointed] angels, harsh and severe; they do not disobey Allah in what He commands them but do what they are commanded. {66:6}

Do you really believe the Imams hid their designation from their sons, as Al-Taq says in the Saheeh Hadith to Imam Zayd

يروي الشيخ محمد بن يعقوب الكُليني ، بإسناده ، وهي قويّةٌ عندَ السيد الخوئي ، عن على بن الحكم، عن أبان قال: ((أخبرني الاحول أن زيد بن علي بن الحسين عليهما السلام بعث إليه وهو مستخف قال: فأتيته فقال لي: يا أبا جعفر ما تقول ان طرقك طارق منا أتخرج معه؟ قال: فقلت له: إن كان أباك أو أخاك، خرجت معه قال: فقال لي: فأنا أريد أن أخرج أجاهد هؤلاء القوم فأخرج معي قال: قلت: لا ما أفعل جعلت فداك، قال: فقال لي: أترغب بنفسك عني؟ قال: قلت له: إنما هي نفس واحدة فإن كان لله في الأرض حجة فالمتخلف عنك ناج والخارج معك هالك وان لا تكن لله حجة في الارض فالمتخلف عنك والخارج معك سواء. قال: فقال لي: يا أبا جعفر كنت أجلس مع أبي على الخوان فيلقمني البضعة السمينة ويبرد لي اللقمة الحارة حتى تبرد، شفقة علي، ولم يشفق علي من حر النار، إذا أخبرك بالدين ولم يخبرني به؟ فقلت له: جعلت فداك شفقته عليك من حر النار لم يخبرك، خاف عليك: أن لا تقبله فتدخل النار، وأخبرني أنا، فإن قبلت نجوت، وإن لم أقبل لم يبال أن أدخل النار، ثم قلت له: جعلت فداك أنتم أفضل أم الانبياء؟ قال: بل الانبياء قلت: يقول يعقوب ليوسف: يا بني لا تقصص رؤياك على إخوتك فيكيدوا لك كيدا، لم لم يخبرهم حتى كانوا لا يكيدونه ولكن كتمهم ذلك فكذا أبوك كتمك لانه خاف عليك، قال: فقال: أما والله لئن قلت ذلك لقد حدثني صاحبك بالمدينة أني اقتل واصلب بالكناسة وأن عنده لصحيفة فيها قتلي وصلبي. فحججت فحدثت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام بمقالة زيد وما قلت له، فقال: لي: أخذته من بين يديه ومن خلفه وعن يمينه وعن شماله ومن فوق رأسه ومن تحت قدميه، ولم تترك له مسلكا يسلكه))

[أصول الكافي:1:174] - [Al-Kafi: 1/174]

Points mentioned in the authentic Hadith:

  • Imam Zayd is unaware of the presumed designation of his father, brother, and nephew.
  • Al-Taq says it has been hidden from you because your father feared you would be envious
  • Imam Zayd tells Al-Taq that the very one he considers to be an Imam over him foretells that he (Imam Zayd) will be crucified, so go and ask him.

Note: One may come and say this is an indication that Imam Sadiq has the knowledge of the unseen, but this cannot be farther from the truth. The Hadith mentions Imam Zayd is telling Al-Taq that Imam Al-Sadiq has a book which foretells his death, therefore, indicating that Imam Zayd himself has already looked through that book and is well aware of its content.

  • Another point to mention from the Hadith is that Al-Taq tells Imam Zayd whoever goes with you shall perish i.e go to hell, and not perish in terms of dying. The reason why is because he mentions if there wasn't a Hujjah of Allah on earth, then if someone would rise with you it wouldn't matter i.e in terms of salvation. Therefore, it is clear Al-Taq is saying anyone who rises with Imam Zayd is going to hell. To further articulate this point I would like to share an excerpt from rijal Al-Barqi, he tried to highlight that one of his rijaal did tawba from fighting alongside Imam Zayd!

ال البَرقِي من الإماميّة يُترجمُ لرَجُلٍ هُو : ((سُليمان بن خالد البَجلي الأقطَع، كُوفيّ، كَان خَرجَ مَعَ زَيد بن عَلي فَأفلَتَ، وفِي كِتاب سَعد: أنّه خَرَج مَع زَيد فَأفلتَ، فَمَنَّ الله عَليه وتَابَ ورجَعَ بَعدَه)) [رجال البَرقي:32] .

Let us go to a neutral perspective and see what Ibn Atheer (a Sunni historian) narrates about those who came to inquire about the uprising of Imam Zayd:

-  قال ابن الأثير : ((وَكَانَتْ طَائِفَةٌ أَتَتْ جَعْفَرَ بْنَ مُحَمَّدٍ الصَّادِقَ قَبْلَ خُرُوجِ زَيْدٍ، فَأَخْبَرُوهُ بِبَيْعَةَ زَيْدٍ، فَقَالَ: بَايِعُوهُ فَهُوَ وَاللَّهِ أَفْضَلُنَا وَسَيِّدُنَا، فَعَادُوا وَكَتَمُوا ذَلِكَ)) [الكامل في التاريخ:4/266] 
 

Ibn Al-Atheer states: There was a group that came to Ja'far son of Muhammad, and they informed him that Zayd was rallying up supporters for an uprising, he said: Give your allegiance to him, by Allah he is the most superior of us, and he is our master, so they returned and concealed what was told to them.

[Al-Kamil fi'l Tarikh 4/266]

 

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, Ali_Hussain said:

Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya didn't believe in the imama of Imam Sajjad (a) so how do you interpret that?

https://www.alrasd.net/arabic/islamicheritagee/1464

Imam Sajjad عليه السلام  isn't a designated Imam, thank you for sharing the fact that Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه supports our claim. 

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
2 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Imam Sajjad عليه السلام  isn't a designated Imam, thank you for sharing the fact that Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه supports our claim. 

I thought Zaydis and Ja'faris believed in the same first 5 imams? Who do you believe was the imam after Imam Husayn (a)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Another point to mention from the Hadith is that Al-Taq tells Imam Zayd whoever goes with you shall perish i.e go to hell, and not perish in terms of dying. The reason why is because he mentions if there wasn't a Hujjah of Allah on earth, then if someone would rise with you it wouldn't matter i.e in terms of salvation. Therefore, it is clear Al-Taq is saying anyone who rises with Imam Zayd is going to hell. To further articulate this point I would like to share an excerpt from rijal Al-Barqi, he tried to highlight that one of his rijaal did tawba from fighting alongside Imam Zayd!

Salam , Nobody in sane mind accepts such hateful & insulting conclusion such nonsense only comes out ill minded people likewise Salafis/ Wahabis based on nonsense of cursed Yazid (la) about perishing of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) which in contrast of your wrong interpretation , Mumin Al-Taq (رضي الله عنه) , by the same token , Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام)  have believed to salvation of martyr Zaid (رضي الله عنه) which you have insulted to  martyr Zaid (رضي الله عنه) by this nonsense just for approving your deviation under guise of supporting Zaidism because It's clear that  Mumin Al-Taq (رضي الله عنه)  has staunch supporter of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) specially Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) againsts Nawasib which by accusing him to this nonsense you have accused Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) to lying (God forbids).

11 hours ago, Zaidism said:

The Abbasid State and the Imamiyyah

The evidence for the close association of the Imamis with the Abbasids are found in their own Rijali work and they highlight the position held by their men. We highlight some of the names:-

Hisham bin Al-Hakam

He was amongst the Ashab Al-Ijma and Salaf of the Imamis, he was one of the servant of Yahya bin Khalid Al-Barmaki then he became one of the inner-circle (Khawas) of Harun Al-Abbasi. Mentioned in Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith by Sayyed Al-Khoei. He was their star and brightest Imami scholar who allegedly learnt directly from Imam Ja’far Al-Sadiq (ع).

Isa bin Rawdha 

Al-Najashi said he was the bodyguard of Al-Mansur, a great Mutakalim, he has a book on Imamat, some of their companions (Imamis) said to have seen this book. They have read in some of the books that when Al-Mansur is doubtful (regarding something) he would call upon Isa bin Rawdha who was amongst his Mawla. [Rijal Al-Najashi-294]
This was also narrated by Abdul Husayn Al-Shubastari in Al-Faiq Fi Al-Ashab Imam Al-Sadiq]

It is said by Sayyed Hasan Al-Sadr that he was amongst the Tabieen, Mutaqadin in the area of Kalam and Usul Al-Madhab he was mentioned amongst the earliest authors who established Shiism [Taklimat Amal Al-Aamal: 182/4] 

He was an influential man during the time of Al-Mansur who founded the city of Madinah Al-Salam (ie Baghdad). He was mentioned in the book Tarikh Al-Baghdad written by Ahmad bin Abi Tahir. 

Abbas Iqbal Ashtayani said he was amongst the earliest authors in the matter of Imamah amongst the Imami Mutakalimun

Muhammad bin Ismail bin Yazi’.


He is amongst the narrators of the Principle books of the Imamis. Sheikh Al-Tusi mentioned in Al-Fahrist, Al-Najashi said he was the Mawla (slave) of Abu Mansur, he was amongst the Thiqat, he has many deeds.

Yaqtin bin Musa 


He was with the Abbasid during the battle against Imam Al-Husayn bin Ali Al-Fakhi (ع) (Kitab Akbar Fakh). 

Sheikh Al-Tusi said regarding him: He never shrugged off from his duty towards Al-Saffah, Al-Mansur and he was also a Shii and also his son (Al-Fahrist:155), his son Ali was also close to the ministers of the Abbasids. 

Al-Najashi said it was narrated from Imam Al-Saddiq, that letters were sent from him at that time he was the Wali of Al-Ahwaz before Al-Mansur [Rijal Al-Najashi:213]

Abdullah bin Sinan 

Al-Najashi said he was the treasurer of Al-Mansur, Al-Mahdi, Al-Hadi and Al-Rashid, a Kufi, trustworthy, from their great Companions (Imamis). He has a book called Salat Al-Kabir in it all the Halal and Haram (ie laws) are found [Rijal Al-Najashi:214]

Al-Barqi said he is from the Mawla of Bani Abbas, was the minister of Al-Mahdi, Musa and Harun [Mu’jam Rijal Al-Hadith: 5/32]

Daud bin Ali Al-Abidi

Sheikh Al-Tusi said he was from the companions of Al-Mahdi [Rijal Al-Tusi:375]

Ali bin Yaqtin bin Musa


He like his father was a companion of Al-Saffah, Abi Ja’far and took part in the battle of Fakh with the Abbasids. 

Sheikh Al-Tussi said he was Thiqat, great status in the Imami school, when he died, his Janazah prayers was led by the crown Prince Muhammad bin Al-Rashid [Al-Fahrist:154] 

His brother Ubayd bin Yaqtin bin Musa was the killer of the Salaf of the Itrah Sulayman bin Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan bin Ali (ع). [Akhbar Al-Fakh]. 

We could see how close the Early Imami scholars were with the Abbasid State. One of the famous families who represented Imamis were the Nawbakht family, they occupied high positions in the Abbasid court also documented in their own books. One of the four Deputies of the Hidden Twelve Imams was Al-Husayn Ibn Al-Ruh Al-Nawbakhti, from the Nawbakhti family. There are a lot more examples of their direct participation in the Abbasid Government. 

The Abbasids did not consider them as opponents because they not only failed to support any of the sons of their 12 Imams but also led armies to wage war against them for the Abbasids and they call themselves Shias of Imam Ali.

Harun Al-Abbasi said: 
والله ما بيني وبين الإمامية خلاف فلئن قام إمامهم على الصفة التي ذكروا لأكونن أول من تبعه، وما عدوي وعدو آبائي إلا هؤلاء الزيدية الذين كلما خرج من هؤلاء القوم خارج أصلتوا أسيافهم بين يديه، وتغسلوا وتحنطوا يطلبون الجنة)) [الشافي]

By Allah I have no difference (ikhtilaf) with the Imamiyyah, when their Imams rise with the attributes they mention, I will be the first to follow, and my enemy and the enemy of my ancestors are those Zaydis, whenever someone from amongst them do khuruj, they straighten (or raise) their swords  between their arms, and they wash and embalm with it and they seek Jannah
[Narrated by Imam Abdullah bin Hamza in Al-Shafi]

all of them were in service of Abbasids by order of infallible Imam of their time under Taqyia for greater cause of supporting whole of Shia community even Zaydis against further oppresion of Abbasids & preventing genocide & perishing whole of Shias even Zaydis.

Quote

Abu l-Ḥasan ʿAlī b. Yaqtīn b. Musā al-Baghdādi (Arabic: ابوالحسن علي بن یقطین بن موسی البغدادی) (b. 124/741-2 - d. 182/798-9) was a Shi'a muhaddith, jurist, and theologian. He was born in Kufa and lived in Baghdad. He was a famous Shi'a personality during the life of Imam al-Sadiq (a) and Imam al-Kazim (a). The most notable thing about his life is that he was a reliable vizier of Abbasid Dynasty although he was a Shi'a. Ibn Yaqtin had an elite status before Imams and also Shi'a scholars. Biographers has attributed three books to him.

He [ʿAlī b. Yaqtīn] entered the Abbasid government by the permission and guidance of Imam al-Kazim (a)[6].[7] in order to help and support oppressed people especially Shi'as.[8] For many times, he was informed against about his faith and relations with Imam al-Kazim (a) in front of Harun al-Rashid; but miraculously he was not hurt in any of the cases.

Quote

Faith

There is no doubt that he was a Shi'a; but he always hid his faith from 'Abbasids as his father did. He was a close companion to Imam al-Kazim (a) and had a great credibility before the Imam.

According to some historical evidence that have been accepted by Shi'a scholars, he entered the Abbasid government by the permission and guidance of Imam al-Kazim (a)[6].[7] in order to help and support oppressed people especially Shi'as.[8] For many times, he was informed against about his faith and relations with Imam al-Kazim (a) in front of Harun al-Rashid; but miraculously he was not hurt in any of the cases.

 

Quote

Among Scholars
Shi'a scholars including: al-Najashi, al-Shaykh al-Tusi, al-'Allama al-Hilli, Ibn Shahrashub, al-Mamaqani, and al-Sayyid Abu l-Qasim al-Khoei counted him as one of the closest companions of Imam al-Kazim (a) who had great status before the Imam. They described him as a jurist, theologian, reliable, trustworthy and a high prestige narrator who also had authored some books.[17].[18].[19].[20].[21] Obviously, there is no dispraise about him in rijal sources.

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Ali_b._Yaqtin

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Zaidism said:
  • Affirmed that Zayd son of Musa is Zaydi
  • Affirmed that the brother of Imam Ridha (from his mother) is Zaydi 
  • Affirmed that Muhammad son of Ja'far is Zaydi
  • Affirmed that the other sons of Imam Sadiq were not twelvers, he states that they became waqefyah, but that is incorrect, as displayed they were Zaydis.

 

Quote

Affirmed that the brother of Imam Ridha (from his mother) is Zaydi 

His name was Zaid but he had no interest in Zaydism which he has stated his own rebelion for gathering followers around himself just for sake of his personal gaining power &  wealth by burning house of people which Imam Reza /Ridha (عليه السلام) has diassociated from him which his title has became زید النار Zaid the burner due to burning house of people  & stealing their property .

rest of three have refuted in similar fashion of brother of Imam Ridha (عليه السلام)

11 hours ago, Zaidism said:

The son of Al-Hadi (Ja'far) requires no introduction, as the twelver school calls him Ja'far the liar, to us he is known as Ja'far the purified! He rose after the death of his brother Al-Hassan Al'Askari ((عليه السلام)). Free are these blessed sons of Al-Zahra from your slander. The son of Ja'far Al Zaki, son of Al-Hadi, who is known as Idrees is also known to be a zaydi.

He crystaly clear has been puppet & spy  of Abbasid king in house of Imam Hasan Askari  which has been betrayed  to Ahlulbayt  (عليه السلام) for gaining wealth & power which only Nawasib call him purified because he has been purified from Iman & entered to range of Nawasib & Abbasids in similar fashion which Son of prophet  Noah has denied  his father & drowned  with nonbelievers.

4 hours ago, Zaidism said:

mam Sajjad عليه السلام  isn't a designated Imam, thank you for sharing the fact that Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه supports our claim.

at the end o day Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه  has verified divine appointment  & infallibility  of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) when Hajar al aswad by premision  of Allah  confirmed  divine appointment  & infallibility  of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

 

His name was Zaid but he had no interest in Zaydism which he has stated his own rebelion for gathering followers around himself just for sake of his personal gaining power &  wealth by burning house of people which Imam Reza /Ridha (عليه السلام) has diassociated from him which his title has became زید النار Zaid the burner due to burning house of people  & stealing their property .

rest of three have refuted in similar fashion of brother of Imam Ridha (عليه السلام)

He crystaly clear has been puppet & spy  of Abbasid king in house of Imam Hasan Askari  which has been betrayed  to Ahlulbayt  (عليه السلام) for gaining wealth & power which only Nawasib call him purified because he has been purified from Iman & entered to range of Nawasib & Abbasids in similar fashion which Son of prophet  Noah has denied  his father & drowned  with nonbelievers.

at the end o day Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه  has verified divine appointment  & infallibility  of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) when Hajar al aswad by premision  of Allah  confirmed  divine appointment  & infallibility  of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) .

Salam do you have proof from Twelver texts to prove all this? Would greatly appreciate it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Within this post I will seek to demonstrate the undeniable fact that the sons of the Imams were Zaydis.

You don't really need to demonstrate it. We know Zayd shaheed was the son of Imam Al-Sajjad (عليه السلام) and from him the Zaidiyyah sect was emerged. 

We also know another son of Imam, infact the son of Imam Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام), Isma'il bin Ja'far & his son Muhammad bin Isma'il from where Isma'ili sect emerged. 

We also know much more and have swim past the 1450 years of history. We have also seen many close companions of Imams been misguided and have changed their courses. 

Point is that who were Imam Muhammad Al-Baqir (عليه السلام), Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام), Imam Musa Al-Kazim (عليه السلام) to Imam Hassan Al-Askari (عليه السلام)? Were they Zaidi's? If not why? 

You should reflect of these questions. 

يُثَبِّتُ اللّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ بِالْقَوْلِ الثَّابِتِ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَفِي الآخِرَةِ

The قَوْلِ الثَّابِتِ is the wilayah of Imams of Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope no one goes off at a tangent like in the previous threads. Can we please address what brother @Zaidismis mentioning in this thread? What do us twelvers make of the ahadith he’s discussed? Are they authentic? I genuinely want to know and hope this will be a fruitful discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Ali_Hussain said:

I thought Zaydis and Ja'faris believed in the same first 5 imams? Who do you believe was the imam after Imam Husayn (a)?

The particular designation is for the first three, the general designation is for the sons of Fatema until the day of judgement. The one who establishes a system of governance, or rises against a tyrant is considered an Imam.

The Imam after Imam Hussein ((عليه السلام)) is his nephew Imam Al-Hassan Al-Muthana.

Some backstory:

He fought alongside Imam Hussein ((عليه السلام)) in the battle of Karbala and married Fatema the daughter of Imam Hussein, she resembled Lady Fatema ((عليه السلام)) the most and was the dearest to our master Imam Hussein ((عليه السلام)) - they gave birth to Imam Abdullah, the great Imam that twelvers slander.


He killed 19 of the enemies in the battle of Karbala and later succumbed to his wounds and was left to die on the plains of Karbala, alongside the valiant martyrs. He was saved by one of his uncles, a man by the name of Usamah from the Al’Fazari tribe, considering his relations to the tribe of his mother (he was not his literal uncle).


Taken to Kufa, Usamah bandaged the wounds of Imam Hassan, and after three months Imam Hassan made a full recovery and returned to Medina.
During the time of AbdulMalik son of Marwn the Ummayad Caliph, Al Hajaj gave the authority for Abdulrahman b. Muhammad Al’Ash’ath to go and overtake Sistan.


Abdulrahman went with a strong envoy of 3,000 combatants, among them esteemed and reputable scholars and jurists, when Abdulrahman was able to overtake Sistan, he was advised by the accompanying scholars to rise against Hajaj, and the corrupt Ummayd rulership, so as to their advice he set on towards Al’Sham and there the forces of Hajaj met him. 70 - 75 battles were fought between the forces of Al’Hajaj and Abdulrahman, the majority of the battles were won by Abdulrahman (losing a sum of 2-3 battles) - this all transpired throughout the course of three years. (81-83 A.H)


The support for Abdulrahman was great, because the jurists of Kufa at the time believed in uprising against tyrants, they advised that Abdulrahman send for one of the sons of Fatema ((عليه السلام)). This once again supports the belief that leadership after Imam Hussein is in the hands of a fatimid from either the sons of Imam Hassan, or Imam Hussein. [The conditions of being eligible are mentioned on the questions about Zaidi beliefs thread]


The two Fatimids they pointed to were Ali b. Al Hussein, and Hassan b. Al Hassan 
Imam Ali b. Al-Hussein ((عليه السلام)) did not accept their invitation, and this can easily be understood by the cautiousness he had towards the people of Sistan, after he saw the betrayal Imam Hussein had faced. 


Imam Hassan b. Hassan ((عليه السلام)) carried the same sentiments of Imam Sajjad. However, the circumstances required a Fatimid to accept the call of the people of Sistan, and as the letters and promises continued to pour, Imam Hassan (Al-Muthana) accepted the call of the people of Sistan and rose.
This once again indicates the Zaydi root of a Fatimid rising against the tyrant of their time, and considering that the twelvers believe no one can rise ahead of the Imam of their time, it is clear that Imam Hassan did not know of this proposed designation of twelve Imams, otherwise he would have followed suit with his cousin Ali b. Al Hussein ((عليه السلام))

Furthermore, twelver works highlight a verbal exchange between Imam Hassan and Zayn’Al-Abideen ((عليه السلام)) wherein Imam Hassan is angry at Al-Sajjad and goes as far as uttering insults towards him! We of course are free from such a terrible narrative that is painted in regards to the relationship between these two great giants of the pure progeny. However, the indication is clear that if Imam Hassan believed in the Godly designated Imamate of Al-Sajjad, how could he behave in this manner towards the Imam of his time?

Source for the alleged exchange: لطبرسي في إعلام الورى بأعلام الهُدى 1/490 ، وابن شهر آشوب في المناقب 3/2966 

 It is once again clear from the uprising of Imam Hassan, and the claimed interaction painted by twelvers in later books
 - that seek to create a further gap between the sons of Fatema ((عليه السلام)) - that Imam Hassan b. Hassan was on the orthodox path of the Zaydi school, of uprising against tyrants and not being knowledgeable towards a purported designation. Another keen indication is the fact that the great jurists of Kufa did not request Imam Sajjad in particular, rather they sought a Fatimid from either the sons of Imam Hassan, or Hussein which once again maintains the Zaydi understanding. 
 

Sources:

– كتاب المصابيح ، لأبي العباس الحسني (ع) 
– كتاب الحدائق الورديّة في مناقب أئمّة الزيدية ، للشهيد حميد المحلي 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Zaid the burner due to burning house of people  & stealing their property .

 

6 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

puppet & spy  of Abbasid king in house of Imam Hasan Askari 

Look at the level of delusion these people have reached, they go so far to defame the sons of Al-Zahra, because they know they themselves stand as arguments against their creed. 

So Ja'far Al-Zaki was a spy, but that list of names I just shared of your narrators, who weren't raised with any Imam and lived in Kufa, while Imam lived in Medina, are completely fine? They weren't spies! No, no, it was taqiyyah... The Imam with his 'knowledge of the unseen' couldn't tell that his own son was a spy?

The twelver discrepancy will continue until this whole house of delusion collapses, you had it easy arguing with Sunnis over tajseem, the illogical nature of following all companions, rejecting Ahlul-Kissa, etc. You are now getting a reality check from the very house of the Ahlulbayt, this school was carried in the laps of the Progeny of the Holy Prophet.

Any Hadith works you have before the 3rd century are unreliable! Whereas you see a rich tradition from us, and I will highlight these works soon Insha'Allah, in the meantime here is a link: https://alkazemalzaidy2013.wordpress.com/دليل-الباحث-إلى-علوم-أهل-البيت-ومذهبهم/

6 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

at the end o day Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه  has verified divine appointment  & infallibility  of Imam Sajjad

Source?

6 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

His name was Zaid but he had no interest in Zaydism

I shared a video of a twelver scholar stating it, and I shared two twelver sources, you are lost brother. I will stop entertaining any discussions with you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
41 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

The one who establishes a system of governance, or rises against a tyrant is considered an Imam.

So all those in the history who have established a system of governance are your Imams? 

What is the scale for weighing or declaring that someone is tyrant? 

This definition is quite weird brother. It seems that special provisions have been made here specifically to make the incompetent suitable for a thing which according to Quran, is a divine covenant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
26 minutes ago, Cool said:

So all those in the history who have established a system of governance are your Imams? 

What is the scale for weighing or declaring that someone is tyrant? 

This definition is quite weird brother. It seems that special provisions have been made here specifically to make the incompetent suitable for a thing which according to Quran, is a divine covenant. 

My statement was meant to be read with the prerequisites in place, those prerequisites are expounded over in the “Questions over Zaidi beliefs thread”. 

There is a شورى that occurs between the pure Progeny and the one that they find most fit will be given Bay’ah, there’s a lot to be expounded over - this isn’t the place to do it. 

The point that is being made here is that the Ahlulbayt were Zaydis, and alhamdulilah that point has been established beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Salaam,

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Look at the level of delusion these people have reached, they go so far to defame the sons of Al-Zahra, because they know they themselves stand as arguments against their creed. 

I have the impression that according to what you're saying, every single male descendant of Fatima (عليها السلام) is at such a level where saying something negative about them becomes almost kufr, in the same way how Sunnis say that saying something negative about any of the Sahabas is kufr and unimanigable.

Logically speaking, just because someone descends from Fatima (عليها السلام) doesn't mean that they automatically are great and deserve an "alaihi assalam". Yes, the Qur'an told us that the Ahlulbayt are pure, but according to our (12er) traditions this doesn't only apply to the 5, but also to the 9 imams from the lineage of Imam Hussain (peace be upon them all). Now from what I've learned, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but according to your traditions (Zaidi), the verse only applies to the 5, so any descendant of either Imam Hassan or Hussain (عليهما السلام) isn't "tahir/infallible", so logically speaking you can't tell us "How dare you insult this particular son of Al-Zahra ?" since their lives have to be studied and if they did good, then good for them, but if they did bad, then too bad for them.

Now I may get it that you'll tell me that you already told me the requisites for someone to be a (Zaidi) imam, how they not only had to be a descendant, but also just, knowledgeable, etc... But from what you're saying, you're making it look like they were so great only because they descended from Fatima (عليها السلام). If that were the case, then we should also be prasing the son of Hazrat Nuh (عليه السلام) and Qabil, since they were sons of prophets, and you consider them to be higher than Fatima (عليها السلام). Not every member of the Prophetic Household was good, the same way not every sahabi was good. They are only honorific titles and positions, but their actions and way of life are far more important. 

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

I shared a video of a twelver scholar stating it, and I shared two twelver sources

Also a side note for this, but the man from the video is Allahyari, who is basically a "clown" and a shame for our madhab. He goes with the likes of Yasser al-Habeeb, Tawhidi, etc... I wouldn't recommend watching their videos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

I have the impression that according to what you're saying, every single male descendant of Fatima (عليها السلام) is at such a level where saying something negative about them becomes almost kufr, in the same way how Sunnis say that saying something negative about any of the Sahabas is kufr and unimanigable.

These are the sons of the Imams, the people that were raised in their laps, not just any regular descendant.

1 hour ago, Mohamad Abdel-Hamid said:

the verse only applies to the 5, so any descendant of either Imam Hassan or Hussain (عليهما السلام) isn't "tahir/infallible", so logically speaking you can't tell us "How dare you insult this particular son of Al-Zahra ?" since their lives have to be studied and if they did good, then good for them, but if they did bad, then too bad for them.

It also applies to the infallible consensus of the pure Progeny.

I am saying slandering a man who your 6th Imam gave Bay’ah to is quite preposterous. Furthermore, you vindicate hisham, but aren’t consistent in your arguments when it comes to this great Imam. 

I assure you, you won’t find any semblance to what the Sunnis say of Adalat as-sahaba, I am pointing to a shocking reality. This isn’t to the level of alluding towards those who accompanied the Prophet and Imams for a long time, I’m showing that the very people who lived in their homes, who grew up in their laps, and by the testimony of your scholars took knowledge from them -  were all Zaydis. 

You are all free to follow the words of the Abbasid servants I mentioned, as for me the Ahlulbayt will suffice.

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Source?

Imam al-Sajjad (a) invited him to go to al-Hajar al-Aswad (the Black Stone), so that the Imam would be one to whom al-Hajar al-Aswad testifies. Doing so, Muhammad prayed and asked the Stone to testify to his Imama, but nothing happened. Imam al-Sajjad then, after saying prayer, asked so from the Stone, and the Stone uttered a testimony to the Imama of 'Ali b. al-Husayn (a) after his father, al-Husayn b. 'Ali (a), and thus, Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya accepted his Imama.

Quote

Claim for Imamate
Contention with Imam al-Sajjad (a)
Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya knew his brothers, Imam al-Hasan (a) and Imam al-Husayn (a), superior to himself, but after the martyrdom of Imam al-Husayn (a) wrote a letter to Imam al-Sajjad (a) asking him to accept his Imama. He argued that, contrary to previous Imams, Imam al-Husayn (a) had not assigned anyone as the Imam after himself. Besides, he was the son of 'Ali (a), and more qualified owing to his age and great number of hadiths narrated by him.

Imam al-Sajjad (a) invited his uncle to piety and avoiding ignorance in return and noted that:

"My father had recommended me before he set off for Iraq, and had me vow a while before his martyrdom."
Imam al-Sajjad (a) invited him to go to al-Hajar al-Aswad (the Black Stone), so that the Imam would be one to whom al-Hajar al-Aswad testifies. Doing so, Muhammad prayed and asked the Stone to testify to his Imama, but nothing happened. Imam al-Sajjad then, after saying prayer, asked so from the Stone, and the Stone uttered a testimony to the Imama of 'Ali b. al-Husayn (a) after his father, al-Husayn b. 'Ali (a), and thus, Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya accepted his Imama.[27] Some scholars believe that this debate was contrived so that weak Shi'as would not be inclined to the Imamate of Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya.[28]

Belief in the Imamate of Imam al-Sajjad (a)
It is narrated from Imam al-Sadiq (a) that Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya believed in the Imama of Imam al-Sajjad (a).[29] Also Qutb al-Din al-Rawandi has narrated that Abu Khalid al-Kabuli (Muhammad's servant) asked him about his belief regarding Imama, and he answered:

"'Ali b. al-Husayn is the Imam of you and I and all Muslims."[30]

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Muhammad_b._al-Hanafiyya

14 hours ago, Zaidism said:

I shared a video of a twelver scholar stating it, and I shared two twelver sources, you are lost brother. I will stop entertaining any discussions with you. 

because you can't refute facts & reality while you are relying on your deviations  & saying batalant lies about companions  of infallible  Imams & accusing  them to be Abbasid servants based on salafi/wahabi mentality . you are like a drowning person which sticks to anything to save himself from facing reality & facts by running toward any lie for hiding  your deviation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Source?

Quote

  See: Saffar, Basa'ir al-darajat, P.502; Ibn Babawayh, al-Imama wa l-tabsira, P.60-62; Al-Kulayni, al-Kafi, Vol.1, P.348

Al-Rawandi, al-Khara'ij wa al-jara'ih, Vol.1, P.258; al-Majlisi, Bihar al-anwar, Vol.46, P.30
 Ibn Babawayh, al-Imama wa al-tabsira, P.60

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Muhammad_b._al-Hanafiyya#cite_ref-28

On 7/17/2021 at 10:18 AM, Zaidism said:

Imam Sajjad عليه السلام  isn't a designated Imam, thank you for sharing the fact that Muhammad b. Al-Hanafiyyah رضي الله عنه supports our claim.

Belief in the Imamate of Imam al-Sajjad (a)

[Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya]:"'Ali b. al-Husayn is the Imam of you and I and all Muslims."[30]

 Al-Rawandi, al-Khara'ij wa al-jara'ih, Vol.1, P.261-262

Quote

Belief in the Imamate of Imam al-Sajjad (a)
It is narrated from Imam al-Sadiq (a) that Muhammad b. al-Hanafiyya believed in the Imama of Imam al-Sajjad (a).[29] Also Qutb al-Din al-Rawandi has narrated that Abu Khalid al-Kabuli (Muhammad's servant) asked him about his belief regarding Imama, and he answered:

"'Ali b. al-Husayn is the Imam of you and I and all Muslims."[30]

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Muhammad_b._al-Hanafiyya#cite_ref-28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
21 hours ago, Guest Truth said:

Salam do you have proof from Twelver texts to prove all this? Would greatly appreciate it

 

Chapter 58: On What Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) told his Brother Zayd ibn Musa When Zayd was Being Haughty in Al-Ma’mun’s Presence and What Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) said About Mistreating the Shiites

58-2 Al-Hakim Abu Ali Al-Husayn ibn Ahmad al-Bayhaqi narrated that Muhammad ibn Yahya al-Sowli quoted on the authority of Muhammad ibn Zayd al-Nahawi, on the authority of Ibn Abi Abdoon, on the authority of his father, “Zayd ibn Musa - Ar-Ridha’’s brother - rebelled in Basra (in Iraq) in the year 199 A.H. (814 A.D.) and put the Abbasids’ houses on fire. That is why he was called Zayd al-Nar. When Zayd was arrested, Al-Ma’mun told him, ‘O Zayd! You rebelled in Basra (in Iraq) and instead of starting with burning the homes of our enemies from the Tribes of the Umayyads, Thaqeef, Adiy, Bahila and the Aal Ziyad, you started with burning the homes of your cousins!’ Zayd was somewhat of 

a joker and replied, ‘O the Commander of the Faithful (Al-Ma’mun)! I made a big mistake. If I return, I will attend to them (those tribes) this time.’ Al-Ma’mun started to laugh and sent him to his brother Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) with a message saying, ‘I forgave his crime for your sake.” When they brought Zayd in, Imam Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) blamed him and told him, ‘You are free to go anywhere you wish.’ Then the Imam ((عليه السلام).) never spoke to him again for as long as he lived.”

https://www.al-islam.org/uyun-akhbar-ar-ridha-volume-2-shaykh-saduq/chapter-58-what-ar-ridha-told-his-brother-zayd-ibn-musa

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 7/17/2021 at 6:12 AM, Zaidism said:

Affirmed that the brother of Imam Ridha (from his mother) is Zaydi

 

Quote

58-3 Abul Khayr Ali ibn Ahmad al-Nassaba quoted on the authority of his own elders that Zayd ibn Musa was appointed as the intimate companion for Al-Montasir. Al-Montasir was very eloquent in speech, but was of the Zaydite sect. He lived in Baghdad next to the Karkhaya River. He was the same person who had become the head of the army during the time of Abul Saraya. When Abul Saraya was killed, the Zaydites were dispersed.

 

 

Quote

Some of them fled away to Baghdad, others went to Kufa while some others fled to Medina. Zayd ibn Musa (Ar-Ridha’’s brother) was also one of those who had fled. Al-Hassan ibn Fadhl chased him, finally caught him and imprisoned him.

 

 

Quote

Al-Hajjaj ibn Khaythama asked, ‘O Commander! Has the Commander of the Faithful (Harun Ar-Rashid) ordered that Zayd be executed?’ He replied, ‘No.’ Then Al-Haj’jaj ibn Khaythama said, ’Then what allows you to kill the cousin of the Commander of the Faithful (Harun Ar-Rashid), while Harun has not issued this order, and you yourself have not sought his permission either?’ Then Al-Hajjaj ibn Khaythama told Al-Hassan ibn Fadhl the story of Abdullah ibn Aftas - Harun Ar-Rashid’s cousin 

Abul Hassan Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) asked him, ‘O Zayd! Have the words of the narrators from Kufa made you so proud when they say, ‘Fatima ((عليه السلام).) maintained her chastity, thus God has forbidden the Fire from touching her progeny.’ By God, this holds true only for Al-Hassan ((عليه السلام).), Al-Husayn ((عليه السلام).) and Fatima’s own especial offspring.

Abul Hassan Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) told him, ’You are only my brother when you obey God the Honorable the Exalted. Indeed in the Holy Qur’an it says, ‘And Noah called upon his Lord, and said, ‘O my Lord! surely my son is of my family! and Thy promise is true, and Thou art the Justest of Judges!’2 Then God the Honorable the Exalted said, ‘…O Noah! He is not of thy family: For his conduct is unrighteous.’3 And God threw him out (of Noah’s family) since he was a sinner.’”

Quote

Then Yasir (the servant of Imam Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).)) added, “When Zayd was taken to the Imam ((عليه السلام).), Abul Hassan Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) asked him, ‘O Zayd! Have the words of the narrators from Kufa made you so proud when they say, ‘Fatima ((عليه السلام).) maintained her chastity, thus God has forbidden the Fire from touching her progeny.’ By God, this holds true only for Al-Hassan ((عليه السلام).), Al-Husayn ((عليه السلام).) and Fatima’s own especial offspring. However, if it were the case that your father Musa ibn Ja’far ((عليه السلام).) obeyed God, fasted in the daytime and worshipped God at night, but you disobey God and claim to be equal to him (Musa ibn Ja’far ((عليه السلام).)) in the Hereafter on the Resurrection Day, this would imply that you are dearer than him in the sight of God. By God, no one can attain the ranks near God the Honorable the Exalted except by obeying Him. Do you think that you can attain such ranks by committing sins? Surely you are wrong.’ Zayd said, ‘I am your brother and the son of your father.’ Then Abul Hassan Ar-Ridha’ ((عليه السلام).) told him, ’You are only my brother when you obey God the Honorable the Exalted. Indeed in the Holy Qur’an it says, ‘And Noah called upon his Lord, and said, ‘O my Lord! surely my son is of my family! and Thy promise is true, and Thou art the Justest of Judges!’2 Then God the Honorable the Exalted said, ‘…O Noah! He is not of thy family: For his conduct is unrighteous.’3 And God threw him out (of Noah’s family) since he was a sinner.’”

https://www.al-islam.org/uyun-akhbar-ar-ridha-volume-2-shaykh-saduq/chapter-58-what-ar-ridha-told-his-brother-zayd-ibn-musa

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Mashallah excellent post. Thanks 

I think the observer of all these 12er Zaidi threads needs to ask what is the orthodox Shia position.

 

11 hours ago, Zaidism said:

, I’m showing that the very people who lived in their homes, who grew up in their laps, and by the testimony of your scholars took knowledge from them -  were all Zaydis. 

here is an undeniable example for refuting  your baseless claim because we rely on facts & reality instead of relying on batalant  lies of cocaine  addict Allahyari the self claimed scholar which he couldn't  finish basics of Fiqh in any Hawza thus all of Hawzas throw him out because of his deviated belief & mind unstability problems  which also  at least two sons of Imam Musa Kadhim has been loyal follower of Imam Ridha (عليه السلام) while  both of them e have had all qualification  for becoming a Zaydi Imam based on descriptions  of Zaydis from Imam not your baseless  claims & delusions  about Zaydi Imams in contrast he has remained  loyal to 7th Imam & made allegiance  with Imam Ridha (عليه السلام) as divinely  appointed infallible  Imam .

the 6th of Zil-Qa’dah is associated with Seyyed Ahmad, who is venerated throughout Iran as Shah Cheragh or King of Lights, because of a miraculous incident, and his holy mausoleum is situated in the city of Shiraz.

Seyyed Ahmad was the second son of Imam Musa al-Kazem (عليه السلام) and the younger brother of Imam Reza (عليه السلام) – respectively the 7th and 8th Infallible Heirs of Prophet Mohammad (SAWA). Born in Medina, he was loyal to Imam Reza (عليه السلام) and along with his friends and followers, pledged allegiance to him as the rightful Imam on the martyrdom of his father. He was known for his erudite knowledge.

Mamoun the self-styled caliph of the usurper Abbasid regime, who had martyred Imam Reza (عليه السلام) through a fatal dose of poison, ordered the governor of Fars, Qutlugh, to confront and kill Seyyed Ahmad and his entourage. A battle ensued and lasted for three days at the end of which the noble defenders were martyred. Seyyed Ahmad was buried in his armour in the public graveyard of Shiraz.

Quote

. Years later when this son of the 7th Imam was almost forgotten, people began to see light emanating from the graveyard. When a scholar of repute was notified about the matter, he resolved to investigate it. One night he traced the light to a grave and the following morning gave permission for its exhumation. To the pleasant surprise of all those assembled at the site, the corpse that emerged was of bright visage, remarkably fresh, and clad in armour, with a ring on a finger of the right hand bearing the inscription “al-Izzatu-Lillah, Ahmad bin Musa” (All Dignity belongs to God – Ahmad son of Musa).

the shrine of Ahmad ibn Musa has been reconstructed on a grand scale to accommodate the growing number of pilgrims, and enclosed within its precincts is the shrine of another son of Imam Kazem (عليه السلام), named Seyyed Mohammad, who also has been endowed with miraculous powers by God Almighty to answer to the needs of the faithful.

https://parstoday.com/en/radio/iran-i106703-shah_cheragh_the_brother_of_imam_reza_(عليه السلام)

https://www.visitiran.ir/attraction/shah-cheragh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Cheragh

Quote

Why Is It Called Shah Cheragh?

Shah Cheragh means “King of the Light”. There are some narratives about why it is being called “King of the Light”. Some believe that until the reign of Amir Adud Al-Dawla, nobody knew where Ahamed-Ebne-Musa was buried. There were some houses around there. An old woman was living there. she saw a light shining each week on Thursday nights. It kept shining until the sunrise. After a while, she thought to herself that maybe it was a mausoleum of God’s greatest men. She decided to notify Amir Adud Al-Dawla. Amir believed her and decided to go there on the first Thursday. The king went to the old woman’s house and asked her to notify him whenever she sees the light. After a while, the old woman saw the light and was amazed by it and called the king three times: “King! Light!” The king saw the light and sent somebody to investigate who was buried there. They found that it was the mausoleum of Ahamed-Ebne-Musa and the king commanded to build a wonderful monument for him.

https://apochi.com/attractions/shiraz/shah-cheragh/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 7/17/2021 at 6:12 AM, Zaidism said:

The Hadith mentions Imam Zayd is telling Al-Taq that Imam Al-Sadiq has a book which foretells his death, therefore, indicating that Imam Zayd himself has already looked through that book and is well aware of its content.

 

His Death

Muhammad prophesied his death, as narrated by Imam Husayn:

"The Holy Prophet put his sacred hand on my back and said: 'O Hussain, it will not be long until a man will be born among your descendants. He will be called Zaid; he will be killed as a martyr. On the day of resurrection, he and his companions will enter heaven, setting their feet on the necks of the people.'" [2]

Claims to the Imamate

After his death, some felt that he was the rightful successor to his father, rather than his half-brother Muhammad al-Baqir. Those who believe in this line of succession form the Zaidi sect within Shi'a Islam.

Due to the fact that Zaid ibn 'Ali led a rebellion via Jihad against the Umayyad Caliphate, certain Shiites were under the impression that Zaid was claiming imamate for himself and therefore started believing in him as the Imam. This is what developped into the Zaidi sect of Shi'a Islam by his companions.

The Ithna 'Ashari sources do not believe that Zaid claimed imamate for himself. Shaykh Mufid states "However that was not his intention because he knew of the right of his brother, peace be on him, to the Imamate before him, and of his bequest of trusteeship (wasiyya) at his death to Abu 'Abd Allãh (i.e., Jafar as-Sadiq), peace be on him." [4]

There is no evidence in the relationship between Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and Zaid ibn Ali that would demonstrate that Zaid ibn ‘Ali was claiming the Imamate for himself. When Imam Jafar as-Sadiq was informed about Zaid ibn Ali's martyrdom, "he was very sad...and he set apart a thousand dinars of his own money for the families of those of (Zaid's) followers who were killed with him." [5]

https://www.sibtayn.com/en/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5911&Itemid=665

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
On 7/16/2021 at 3:29 PM, Zaidism said:

What I will seek to demonstrate is that The sons of Imam Sadiq were Zaydis, the sons of Imam Kadhim were Zaydis, as well as provide indications that the Imams themselves were Zaydis. 

I see the Qiyas in irresponsible fashion by Zadys who claim as the followers of Ahl alabay (عليه السلام) this is certainly a disastrous for the religion if they are really the followers of ahl alabayt (عليه السلام). The same method of Qiyas we have already seen by selection of First caliph at Saqifa same we have also seen at the time of Fadak by rejecting the view of purified ahl alabayt (عليه السلام) by rulers.

For example, there is a hadith from Imam 'Ali (a) cited in Tuhaf al-'uqul: "do not make qiyas (analogy) in the religion, because the religion cannot be measured by qiyas". There is also a hadith from Imam al-Sadiq (a) according to which if qiyas is made in the religion, then the religion will be wiped out. But Sunni scholars maintain that qiyas is valid.

(We also see from Zaydis such Qiyas here)

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Qiyas

The Zaydis brother's view has been given in thread above mostly by reference of the words of scholars without authentic hadiths to prove such false claims, thus I do not find any reason to mention any response for those. These are straight away rejected as view of zaydis has no basis to provide for justifying the claims about their selection of imams by the people with evidence through the verses of quran (including for the imamate of Zayd shaheed).

I also mention the following verses regarding the Nuh (عليه السلام) and his Son to confirm my view:

(3:33)  إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَىٰ آدَمَ وَنُوحًا وَآلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ

Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah (Nuh) and the family of Abraham and the family of ‘Imran over the worlds

٨٤  وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُ إِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ ۚ كُلًّا هَدَيْنَا ۚ وَنُوحًا هَدَيْنَا مِنْ قَبْلُ ۖ وَمِنْ ذُرِّيَّتِهِ دَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُوسُفَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَهَارُونَ ۚ وَكَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِينَ

84  And We gave to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob – all [of them] We guided. And Noah (Nuh), We guided before; and among his descendants, David and Solomon and Job and Joseph and Moses and Aaron. Thus do We reward the doers of good.

(7:59)  لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِ فَقَالَ يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مَا لَكُمْ مِنْ إِلَٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ إِنِّي أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍ

59  We had certainly sent Noah (Nuh) to his people, and he said, “O my people, worship Allah; you have no deity other than Him. Indeed, I fear for you the punishment of a tremendous Day.

(11:32)  قَالُوا يَا نُوحُ قَدْ جَادَلْتَنَا فَأَكْثَرْتَ جِدَالَنَا فَأْتِنَا بِمَا تَعِدُنَا إِنْ كُنْتَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِينَ

32  They said, “O Noah (Nuh), you have disputed us and been frequent in dispute of us. So bring us what you threaten us, if you should be of the truthful.

(11:36)  وَأُوحِيَ إِلَىٰ نُوحٍ أَنَّهُ لَنْ يُؤْمِنَ مِنْ قَوْمِكَ إِلَّا مَنْ قَدْ آمَنَ فَلَا تَبْتَئِسْ بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْعَلُونَ

36  And it was revealed to Noah (Nuh) that, “No one will believe from your people except those who have already believed, so do not be distressed by what they have been doing.

(11:42) وَهِيَ تَجْرِي بِهِمْ فِي مَوْجٍ كَالْجِبَالِ وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ ابْنَهُ وَكَانَ فِي مَعْزِلٍ يَا بُنَيَّ ارْكَبْ مَعَنَا وَلَا تَكُنْ مَعَ الْكَافِرِينَ

42  And it sailed with them through waves like mountains, and Noah (Nuh) called to his son who was apart [from them], “O my son, come aboard with us and be not with the disbelievers

(11:45)  وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ رَبَّهُ فَقَالَ رَبِّ إِنَّ ابْنِي مِنْ أَهْلِي وَإِنَّ وَعْدَكَ الْحَقُّ وَأَنْتَ أَحْكَمُ الْحَاكِمِينَ

45  And Noah (Nuh) called to his Lord and said, “My Lord, indeed my son is of my family; and indeed, Your promise is true; and You are the most just of judges!

(11:46)  قَالَ يَا نُوحُ إِنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ أَهْلِكَ ۖ إِنَّهُ عَمَلٌ غَيْرُ صَالِحٍ ۖ فَلَا تَسْأَلْنِ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ ۖ إِنِّي أَعِظُكَ أَنْ تَكُونَ مِنَ الْجَاهِلِينَ

46  He said, “O Noah (Nuh), indeed he is not of your family; indeed, he is [one whose] work was other than righteous, so ask Me not for that about which you have no knowledge. Indeed, I advise you, lest you be among the ignorant.

Thus only those of the family of Nuh (عليه السلام) were saved who were righteous excluding his Son.

Thus above examples and verses are sufficient to reject the analogy and false claims that sons of Imams were Zaydis then it can be indicated that imams out of 12 were followers of Zadisim.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 7/17/2021 at 9:25 AM, Guest Truth said:

I really hope no one goes off at a tangent like in the previous threads. Can we please address what brother @Zaidismis mentioning in this thread? What do us twelvers make of the ahadith he’s discussed? Are they authentic? I genuinely want to know and hope this will be a fruitful discussion. 

Thank you brother, it’s pointless, I hope the sincere truth seeker can look into what I shared regarding the sons of the Imams and deduce themselves after careful research. They aren’t interested in genuine discussion, they’re brought up into a reactionist sphere where they don’t understand how to engage in self-reflection. Instead they go on to copy and paste things from Wikipedia, and try to contest the incontestable. 

Think about it, this is Sayyid Khoei who I have shared concurring to this reality that they so bitterly don’t want to accept. The fact that the sons of the Imams consecutively believed in the orthodox school of the Ahlulbayt and supported it. Was Sayyid Al Khoei doing taqiyyah when he mentioned these great personalities to be Zaydis?

If anything they’re showing the weakness of their beliefs, the fact that they’re willing to go so far, so as to defame these great personages, or the fact that they’re skirmishing to find any Hadith to contradict what is so clear and evident. Furthermore, you’ll notice they haven’t an iota of understanding when it comes to the Zaydi creed hence the off-topic questions of which @Cool straw mans into a feeble attempt to form an “argument”. The continuous spamming of Hadiths by @Ashvazdanghe, and @Muslim2010 you know this has been troubling them, because they’ve been on every single thread that echoes Zaydism. 

They, however, do not wish to learn, they want to do the equivalent of shouting, which is spamming every thread and seeking to take away from its substance. The unfortunate reality is that they don’t seem to realize that what they’re doing is all the more evidence for the solidity of the arguments that I’m bringing, and the historical reality that I’m establishing. 

All you need to do is go take a quick scan over Maqatil Al-Talibiyeen, you’ll see that all those ‘Alids who rose during the time that one of the twelve Imams lived, or even after is considered someone to be carrying a banner of misguidance. You will then come to see how preposterous such a claim is, and it is quite ironic that those who support WF come and denounce the personalities whom fundamentally did what the theory of WF called for, and it is establishing a Zaydi system of governance whether they like it or not. 

They don’t challenge me on any of my points, they just make a mess and leave. You can rest assured that their coffin has been nailed by their own tools, and what remains clear and evident beyond a reasonable doubt is:

• The absence of the guidance of the 12th Imam 

• The absence of a Hadith that designates the 9 Imams from the sons of Imam Hussein 

• The fact that the sons of the Imams, and upon further deliberation, the Imams themselves were Zaydis 

• The fact that the guides supposedly placed for us - jurists - are they themselves differing. 

• The absence of a consensus on the fundamentals of Imamate, some say they are infallible, others said they are not. 

• The continuous evolutions of the twelver school.

And so much more! I was really hoping for serious and stimulating discussion on this forum, as a former twelver I thought I’d be taken seriously and we’d all explore these matters sincerely. I hope that the genuine ones can sift through the incoherence - that stems from the inability to concede to evident flaws - and from there reach a sound and logical conclusion.

And declare, “The truth has come and falsehood has vanished. Indeed, falsehood is bound to vanish.” {17:81}

وَقُلْ جَاءَ الْحَقُّ وَزَهَقَ الْبَاطِلُ إِنَّ الْبَاطِلَ كَانَ زَهُوقًا

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Was Sayyid Al Khoei doing taqiyyah when he mentioned these great personalities to be Zaydis?

Who was Syed Khoei? Do you think he refused to accept the truth after getting to it? 

I have already pointed you out the following:

On 7/17/2021 at 3:39 PM, Cool said:

Point is that who were Imam Muhammad Al-Baqir (عليه السلام), Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام), Imam Musa Al-Kazim (عليه السلام) to Imam Hassan Al-Askari (عليه السلام)? Were they Zaidi's? If not why? 

You should reflect of these questions. 

Now if any kafir join this forum and start making threads here and invite us to look the sons of Prophets were kafir. Another one come and invite us look so & so wives of Prophets were kafirs. Nothing would be proved by this while we too accept that yes so & so were kafirs. 

On 7/17/2021 at 3:39 PM, Cool said:

You don't really need to demonstrate it. We know Zayd shaheed was the son of Imam Al-Sajjad (عليه السلام) and from him the Zaidiyyah sect was emerged. 

We also know another son of Imam, infact the son of Imam Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام), Isma'il bin Ja'far & his son Muhammad bin Isma'il from where Isma'ili sect emerged. 

We also know much more and have swim past the 1450 years of history. We have also seen many close companions of Imams been misguided and have changed their courses. 

An Ismai'li will bring his evidences in support of the claim that Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) nominated Isma'il bin Ja'far as his successor. We know which ahadith in our books can be used in support of their claim.

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Furthermore, you’ll notice they haven’t an iota of understanding when it comes to the Zaydi creed hence the off-topic questions of which @Cool straw mans into a feeble attempt to form an “argument”.

It is quite clear to us that the problem exist in your very definition of Imamate. For you, there is no hujjah of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) upon His creation. For you, there are no witnesses from Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) upon creation which many verses of Quran points at. 

We don't have any problem with man made Imams. We keep our focus on divine covenant (Imamate) and its recipients which are معصومين and are belongs to the Ahlul Bayt (عليه السلام) 

We keep our focus of the Ark of Noah introduced by Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) which ensures our نجاة. 

إنما مثل أهل بيتي فيكم كمثل سفينة نوح (عليه السلام)، من دخلها نجا، ومن تخلف عنها غرق.

The likeness of my family among you is like the Ark of Noah (peace be upon him), whoever entered it was saved, and whoever left it was drowned.

This ark which ensures our safety, should be safe in itself at the first place. There should not be an iota of doubt about it that it would misguide us or drown us, hence this demands infallibility as prerequisite. 

The WF type of Imamate is not the ark of Noah, the Imamate of Abu Hanifah, Shafi'i, Hanbal etc is not the ark of Noah and neither the elected Imams from Zaidiyyah are the ark of Noah. 

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

The continuous spamming of Hadiths by @Ashvazdanghe, and @Muslim2010 you know this has been troubling them, because they’ve been on every single thread that echoes Zaydism. 

Thansk we have come to know that presenting the hadith in SC threads is considered as Spamming by a so called  schoalr of Zaydis but sharing the hadith and verses of quran is entirely permitted by the rules of SC :grin:

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

They don’t challenge me on any of my points, they just make a mess and leave. You can rest assured that their coffin has been nailed by their own tools, and what remains clear and evident beyond a reasonable doubt is:

All these have been addressed and refuted many times but you think that every time keeping the eyes closed from the evidences of verses of quran and hadith is just like forgetting those, what an ostrich behavior we see some from SC fellows 

Links of replies for these views are again mentioned below:

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235071442-zaydi-twelver-debate-2/?do=findComment&comment=3354247

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235071442-zaydi-twelver-debate-2/?do=findComment&comment=3354452

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235071442-zaydi-twelver-debate-2/?do=findComment&comment=3354797

We have verses of quran and hadith and relevant research that refute the Zaydis view as usual  that are most alike of sunni behaviors and thoughts and it is thrown back on their side.

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, Cool said:

An Ismai'li will bring his evidences in support of the claim that Imam Ja'far Al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) nominated Isma'il bin Ja'far as his successor. We know which ahadith in our books can be used in support of their claim.

This is actually an excellent point, reflect on this. Everyone can prove the Imamate of their Imams through their own Hadiths via circular reasoning. Now that you finally understand this, I pray that you can understand the erroneous claim of designation that is particular only to your works, works that are post-occultation at that. And to further emphasize the emptiness of what you have, not a single pre-occultation work mentions the number 12, or 12 Imams, it was a systematic purported designation. 

Which means that we take what Al-Khoei concedes to:

The Mutawater narrations have specified the Imams (عليه السلام) by number, not by naming them one by one. Hence, the possibility of doubting the succeeding Imam (عليه السلام) after the preceding Imam (عليه السلام) remained possible. Infact, concealing the name of the Imam (عليه السلام) from the people, except the close companions, was in favour of interest during that time.

al-Khoei, in his book Sirat al-Najat 2/452:

يقول الخوئي: الروايات المتواترة الواصلة إلينا من طريق العامة والخاصة قد حددت الأئمة عليهم السلام باثني عشر من ناحية العدد ولم تحددهم بأسمائهم عليهم السلام واحداً بعد واحد، حتى لا يمكن فرض الشك في الإمام اللاحق بعد رحلة الإمام السابق، بل قد تقتضي المصلحة في ذلك الزمان اختفاءه والتستر عليه لدى الناس؛ بل لدى أصحابهم عليهم السلام إلا أصحاب السر لهم، وقد اتفقت هذه القضية في غير هذا المورد والله العالم

453  كتاب صراط النجاة ج2 ص

Al Khoei says : The authentic mutawatir narrations that reached us through the public (’Ammah - Mainstream Muslims) and private (Khassah – Twelver Shia) paths have defined the imams, peace be upon them, to twelve in terms of number and did not specify them by their names, peace be upon them one by one, so that suspicion cannot be imposed on the later Imam after the previous Imam's journey, but it may require interest at that time that he hid and concealed it among the people. But among their companions, peace be upon them, except those who have the secret for them and this issue has been agreed upon in other than this resource. Sirat al-Najat 2, p. 452-3
 

There is no mention of the 12 by name

And upon further examination, we find that the number 12 was never mentioned pre-occultation! May Allah bless Sayyid Khoei for his honesty. I really hope you won't stoop so low, so as to say 'well, why didn't he become Zaydi' other than that, it really is over for you guys.

23 minutes ago, Cool said:

We keep our focus on divine covenant (Imamate) and its recipients which are معصومين

Did you not bother to read what I have been saying to you for the past dozen responses that I have given to you on this particular point? No worries, I will keep saying it again and again. Believing that the Imams are infallible is not a condition, your grand scholar, whose reliability is questioned by no one {Ibn Al-Junayd} did not believe in the infallibility of the Imams. Therefore, it isn't a matter of creed - their infallibility - it is a matter of ijtihad, so please keep your theories to yourself. 

 

28 minutes ago, Cool said:

We keep our focus of the Ark of Noah introduced by Prophet

As for the Imamiyya, their deviation from the Ahl al-Bayt other than the Twelve is apparent and cannot be denied, they do not mention except the twelve [he means that they do not rely on the Ahlulbayt from the sons of al-Hassan and al-Husayn from the people of the House] in their books. Their dependence on al-Baqir, al-Sadiq, al-Ridha and al-Kazim - peace be upon them - is going to a mirage, because they do not narrate from them except through intermediaries! And none of the children of the Prophet - may God bless him and his family - were among them. In fact, their dependence is on Hisham bin Al-Hakam, Hisham bin Salem, the companion of Al-Taq, and then on Al-Tabarsi, Al-Tusi, Al-Kulayni and Al-Mufid; these people are Noah's Ark to them, they circle with them wherever they turn, and they [twelvers] are farthest from the sons of Imam Hassan and Hussein. 

Sayyid Al’Alamah Al-Hussein b. Yahya Al-Houthi
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Which means that we take what Al-Khoei concedes to:

The Mutawater narrations have specified the Imams (عليه السلام) by number, not by naming them one by one. Hence, the possibility of doubting the succeeding Imam (عليه السلام) after the preceding Imam (عليه السلام) remained possible. Infact, concealing the name of the Imam (عليه السلام) from the people, except the close companions, was in favour of interest during that time.

Please don't just take out his words of your choice from his statement. What has been underlined is a part of his statement and it is quite clear i think where he mentioned the exception too (except the close companions).

17 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Khoei, in his book Sirat al-Najat 2/452:

يقول الخوئي: الروايات المتواترة الواصلة إلينا من طريق العامة والخاصة قد حددت الأئمة عليهم السلام باثني عشر من ناحية العدد ولم تحددهم بأسمائهم عليهم السلام واحداً بعد واحد، حتى لا يمكن فرض الشك في الإمام اللاحق بعد رحلة الإمام السابق، بل قد تقتضي المصلحة في ذلك الزمان اختفاءه والتستر عليه لدى الناس؛ بل لدى أصحابهم عليهم السلام إلا أصحاب السر لهم، وقد اتفقت هذه القضية في غير هذا المورد والله العالم

453  كتاب صراط النجاة ج2 ص

Al Khoei says : The authentic mutawatir narrations that reached us through the public (’Ammah - Mainstream Muslims) and private (Khassah – Twelver Shia) paths have defined the imams, peace be upon them, to twelve in terms of number and did not specify them by their names, peace be upon them one by one, so that suspicion cannot be imposed on the later Imam after the previous Imam's journey, but it may require interest at that time that he hid and concealed it among the people. But among their companions, peace be upon them, except those who have the secret for them and this issue has been agreed upon in other than this resource. Sirat al-Najat 2, p. 452-3

You are doing the mistake again & again. Quoting al-Khoei would never support your argument in anyway. That great scholar died as twelver shia, all what you have quoted above, simply turns down the Zaidiyyah believes. 

22 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

And upon further examination, we find that the number 12 was never mentioned pre-occultationMay Allah bless Sayyid Khoei for his honesty. I really hope you won't stoop so low, so as to say 'well, why didn't he become Zaydi' other than that, it really is over for you guys.

:hahaha: what can I say!! What you have quoted is right above, let the readers analyze the weakness of your argument.

I don't know what is the cause of such ignorance while we have in our hadith books ta'vil of some verses of Quran. 

إن عدة الشهور عند الله اثنا عشر شهرا في كتاب الله يوم خلق السماوات والأرض

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَآئِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا

etc......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
47 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

As for the Imamiyya, their deviation from the Ahl al-Bayt other than the Twelve is apparent and cannot be denied,

I do agree with you here.

As I said, the ark of Noah must be safe in itself at the first place. We don't need to focus on the ones who are "zalimun le nafseh" or who are "Muqtasid". We only focus on the ones who are "sabiqun bil khayraat" and that too not on their own but باذن الله

وَمِنْهُمْ سَابِقٌ بِالْخَيْرَاتِ بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ ذَلِكَ هُوَ الْفَضْلُ الْكَبِيرُ

In other words, we keep our focus on الْفَضْلُ الْكَبِيرُ. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 minutes ago, Cool said:

the weakness of your argument.

Now that you've been cornered, as expected, all you can do is deny, and stick to pathetic ad-hominems that are free from any scholarly demonstration. 

And as expected you go on to say 

22 minutes ago, Cool said:

That great scholar died as twelver shia

Which I predicted by saying, you'll state something along the lines of

56 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

 'well, why didn't he become Zaydi'

Now, we move on to nailing the remaining bolts left in your coffin, and I will continue to use your tools to do so.

24 minutes ago, Cool said:

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَآئِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا

 

روي الشّيخ الصّدوق بإسنادِه ، حَدّثنا عُبيدالله بن عَبد الله بن الحسَن بن جَعفر بن الحسن بن الحسن بن علي قال : سَألت عَلي بن مُوسى بن جَعفر عليهم السلام عمّا يُقَال في بني الأفطَس؟!. فَقال : ((إنّ الله عَزّ وَجلّ أخرَج مِن بَني إسرَائيل وَهُو يَعقُوب بن إسحَاق بن إبراهيم عليه السلام اثني عشَر سِبطاً وَجعلَ فِيهِم النبوّة والكِتاب [أي قبيلَةً يَنتسبون إلى اثنَي عَشر رجلاً من أبناء يعقوب] ، وَنشرَ مِنَ الحسَن والحسين ابنَي أمير المُؤمنين عليهم السلام مِن فاطمة بِنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله اثني عشَر سِبطاً ، ثمّ عَد الاثني عشَر مِن وَلد إسرائيل فقال : رُوبيل بن يعقوب ، وشَمعون بن يعقوب ، ويهودا ابن يعقوب ، ويَشاجر بن يعقوب ، وزيلون بن يعقوب ، ويُوسف بن يعقوب ، وبنيامين بن يعقوب ، ونفتالى بن يَعقوب ، ودَان بن يعقوب ، وسقط عن أبي الحسن النّسابة ثلاثة مِنهم ، ثمّ عَدّ الاثني عَشر مِن ولد الحسن والحسين عليهما السلام فقال : أما الحسَن فَانتشر مِن ستّة أبطُن وَهُم بَنو الحسن بن زَيد بن الحسَن بن عَلي ، وبَنو عبد الله بن الحسن بن الحسن بن عَلي ، وبَنو إبراهيم بن الحسن بن الحسن بن علي ، وبنو الحسن بن الحسن بن الحسن بن علي ، وبَنو داود بن الحسن بن الحسن بن علي ، وبنو جعفر بن الحسن بن الحسن علي ، فَعقب الحسن بن علي مِن هَذه السّتة الأبطُن ، ثمّ عَد بَني الحسين عليه السلام فقال : بَنو محمّد بن عَلي الباقر بن علي بن الحسين عليهم السلام بَطن ، وبَنو عبد الله ابن الباهر بن علي ، وبَنو زيد بن علي بن الحسين ، وبَنو الحسين بن علي بن الحسين بن علي ، وبَنو عمر بن علي بن الحسين بن علي ، وبنو علي بن علي بن الحسين بن علي ، فهؤلاء الستّة الأبطن نَشر الله عَزّ وجلّ مِن الحسين بن علي عليهما السلام)) [الخصال:466] ، وهُنا تأمّل قولَ الإمَام علي بن موسَى الرّضا (ع) : ((إنّ الله عَزّ وَجلّ أخرَج مِن بَني إسرَائيل وَهُو يَعقُوب بن إسحَاق بن إبراهيم عليه السلام اثني عشَر سِبطاً وَجعلَ فِيهِم النبوّة والكِتاب))

Sheikh Al-Saduq narrated with his chain of narrators, that Obaidullah bin Abdullah bin Al-Hassan bin Jafar bin Al-Hassan bin Al-Hassan bin Ali said: I asked Ali bin Musa bin Jafar, peace be upon them, about what is said about Banu Al-Aftas?

He said: “God, the Mighty and the Majestic, brought out from the Children of Israel, which is Ya`qub bin Ishaq bin Ibrahim, peace be upon him, twelve tribes, and made in them the prophethood and the book [i.e. a tribe that belong to the two men], and he spread the two men of the sons of Ya`qub among them from among the ten believers. Fatimah, the daughter of the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, and the family of twelve tribes. 

Then he counted the twelve sons of Israel and said: Rubel ibn Ya’qub, Simeon ibn Ya’qub, Yehuda ibn Ya’qub, Shajar ibn Ya’qub, Zilun ibn Yaqoub, Yusuf ibn Ya‘qub, Benjamin ibn Ya‘qub, and Naftali. Ibn Yaqub, Dan Ibn Yaqub, and three of them fell from the lineage of Abu al-Hasan. 

Then he counted the twelve sons of al-Hasan and al-Husayn, peace be upon them, and said: As for al-Hasan, it spread from six descendants, and they are the sons of al-Hasan ibn Zaid ibn al-Hasan ibn Ali, and the sons of al-Hasan ibn Abdullah ibn al-Hasan. The sons of Ali, the sons of Ibrahim Bin Al Hassan Bin Al Hassan Bin Ali, the sons of Al Hassan Bin Al Hassan Bin Al Hassan Bin Ali, the sons of Dawood Bin Al Hassan Bin Al Hassan Bin Ali, the sons of Jaafar Bin Al Hassan Bin Al Hassan Bin Ali.

Al-Hussein, peace be upon him He said: The children of Muhammad bin Ali Al-Baqir bin Ali bin Ali bin Al-Hussein, peace be upon them, are a line, the children of Abdullah bin Al-Bahir bin Ali, the children of Zaid bin Ali bin Al-Hussein, the children of Al-Hussain bin Ali bin Al-Hussain bin Ali, the children of Omar bin Ali bin Al-Hussain bin Ali, and the children of Ali. Bin Ali Bin Al-Hussein Bin Ali,

so these are the six innermost ones that God, the Mighty and Sublime, has spread from Al-Hussain Bin Ali, peace be upon them.” [Al-Khisal: 466]

You will find that leadership and guidance is in the (collective) offspring of the group, as displayed by the Quran with the 12 Naqibs mentioned, and as explained by our dear Imam Al-Ridha. 

And We verily sent Noah and Abraham and placed the prophethood and the scripture among their seed, and among them there is he who goeth right, but many of them are evil-livers. {Al-Hadeed: 26}

And so, We have bestowed this divine writ as a heritage unto such of Our servants as We chose: and among them are some who sin against themselves; and some who keep half-way [between right and wrong]; and some who, by God’s leave, are foremost in deeds of goodness: [and] this, indeed, is a merit most high {Faatir: 32}
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Now that you've been cornered, as expected, all you can do is deny, and stick to pathetic ad-hominems that are free from any scholarly demonstration. 

:hahaha: cornered!!!!!

We call it اپنے منہ میاں مٹھو بننا :D

You actually have cornered yourself by quoting a clear statement of a 12er scholar. Your intellectual dishonesty exposed when you tried to borrow few words of that statement to make a point of your favor while the statement itself punctures your creed. 

Pathetic indeed!! 

1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

Now, we move on to nailing the remaining bolts left in your coffin, and I will continue to use your tools to do so.

:hahaha: Again!! 

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَآئِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا

I will come to this one too, but let me start with the first verse quoted by me:

1 hour ago, Cool said:

 

إن عدة الشهور عند الله اثنا عشر شهرا في كتاب الله يوم خلق السماوات والأرض

I don't know why you have not taken the interpretation of this one :hahaha:

Here is a hadith:

الْعَيَّاشِيُّ:عَنْ أَبِي خَالِدٍ الْوَاسِطِيِّ،قَالَ: أَتَيْتُ أَبَا جَعْفَرٍ(عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ)يَوْمَ شُكَّ فِيهِ مِنْ رَمَضَانَ،فَإِذَا مَائِدَةٌ مَوْضُوعَةٌ وَ هُوَ يَأْكُلُ،وَ نَحْنُ نُرِيدُ أَنْ نَسْأَلَهُ،فَقَالَ:«ادْنُوا الْغَدَاءَ،إِذَا كَانَ مِثْلُ هَذَا الْيَوْمِ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ فِيهِ سَبَبٌ تَرَوْنَهُ فَلاَ تَصُومُوا».

ثُمَّ قَالَ:«حَدَّثَنِي أَبِي،عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ(عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ)عَنْ أَمِيرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ(عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ):أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ(صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ آلِهِ)لَمَّا ثَقُلَ فِي مَرَضِهِ،قَالَ:أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ،إِنَّ السَّنَةَ اثْنَا عَشَرَ شَهْراً،مِنْهَا أَرْبَعَةٌ حُرُمٌ،ثُمَّ قَالَ [1] بِيَدِهِ:رَجَبٌ مُفْرَدٌ،وَ ذُو الْقَعْدَةِ، وَ ذُو الْحِجَّةِ،وَ الْمُحَرَّمُ ثَلاَثٌ مُتَوَالِيَاتٌ.أَلاَ وَ هَذَا الشَّهْرُ الْمَفْرُوضُ شَهْرُ رَمَضَانَ،فَصُومُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ،وَ أَفْطِرُوا لِرُؤْيَتِهِ، فَإِذَا خَفِيَ الشَّهْرُ فَأَتِمُّوا الْعِدَّةَ شَعْبَانَ ثَلاَثِينَ،وَ صُومُوا الْوَاحِدَ وَ الثَّلاَثِينَ،وَ قَالَ بِيَدِهِ:اَلْوَاحِدَ وَ الاِثْنَيْنِ وَ الثَّلاَثَةَ،ثُمَّ ثَنَى إِبْهَامَهُ،ثُمَّ قَالَ:أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ،شَهْرُ كَذَا وَ شَهْرُ كَذَا.وَ قَالَ عَلِيٌّ(عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ):صُمْنَا مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ(صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَ آلِهِ)تِسْعَةً وَ عِشْرِينَ يَوْماً وَ لَمْ نَقْضِهِ،وَ رَآهُ تَمَاماً».

wow!!! You really have cornered me :hahaha: and nailed the remaining bolts. 

Actually you don't have the potential to corner me. And you don't even know our hadith sciences. 

So let me deflate your balloon first:

رَوَى الشَّيْخُ الْمُفِيدُ هَذَيْنِ الْخَبَرَيْنِ فِي كِتَابِ(الْغَيْبَةِ) [1].

99-/4535 _3- وَ عَنْهُ،قَالَ:أَخْبَرَنَا سَلاَمَةُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ،قَالَ:أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنِ بْنِ عَلِيِّ بْنِ مَهْزِيَارَ [2]،قَالَ:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ السَّيَّارِيُّ،عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلاَلٍ،قَالَ:وَ حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْحَنَّانِيُّ [3]،عَنْ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ هِلاَلٍ،عَنْ أُمَيَّةَ بْنِ مَيْمُونٍ الشَّعِيرِيِّ،عَنْ زِيَادٍ الْقَنْدِيِّ،قَالَ:سَمِعْتُ أَبَا إِبْرَاهِيمَ مُوسَى بْنَ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ(عَلَيْهِمُ السَّلاَمُ)أَجْمَعِينَ يَقُولُ: «إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ خَلَقَ بَيْتاً مِنْ نُورٍ،وَ جَعَلَ قِوَامَهُ أَرْبَعَةَ أَرْكَانٍ:اَللَّهُ أَكْبَرُ،وَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ،وَ سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ،وَ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ [4].ثُمَّ خَلَقَ مِنَ الْأَرْبَعَةِ أَرْبَعَةً،وَ مِنَ الْأَرْبَعَةِ أَرْبَعَةً،ثُمَّ قَالَ عَزَّ وَ جَلَّ: إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ عِنْدَ اللّٰهِ اثْنٰا عَشَرَ شَهْراً فِي كِتٰابِ اللّٰهِ

Second:

We use our intellect too. Here is a wonderful explanation:

https://www.najafpost.com/index.php?load=articles/view/details&id=936

 

والسؤال المطروح : هل ماذكره هؤلاء المفسّرين بياناً لمعنى الاية ـ من كون المقصود من الاشهر الاثني عشر هي الاشهر الزمانية القمرية ـ هو ظاهر الاية المنحصر ، أم انه هناك ظهور أقوى تناولا ممّا ذكروه ، وبتعبير آخر هل ماذكره المفسرون هو تمام مفاد الاية ، أم أنه يمكن أن يستحصل من ظاهر الاية مفاداً آخرا هو أقرب مما ذكروه ؟

بالتأمل الظاهري في ألفاظ الاية الكريمة وما فيها من قيود يمكن أن يستحصل مفاداً آخرا للاية الكريمة ، بل يمكن ان يقال بكون المراد من الاشهر الاثني عشر ليست هي الزمانية القمرية ، والجزم بذلك ليس فيه شائبة المجازفة وله دليله الواضح الجلي ، ويشهد له عدة من القرائن والقيود اللفظية المذكورة في الاية الكريمة وهي :

القرينة الاولى  :

تقييد الشهور بأنها «عند الله» احترازاً عن الشهور التي هي عند البشر ، فجيء في الاية بهذا القيد لكي لاينصرف الذهن الى الاشهر المأنوسة لدى الناس وهي الاشهر الزمانية القمرية ، والاصل في القيود ـ كما في أصول الفقه ـ الاحترازية ، ويكون توضيحياً ([2][3])  مع القرينة الظاهرة على ذلك .

ولايوجد في القرآن الكريم قيد توضيحي ، فجميع القيود اللفظية المذكورة في القرآن الكريم احترازية ، حتى مثل قوله تعالى ( واذ قال ابراهيم لابيه آزر أتتخذ أصناماً آلهة ) ([3][4])  فتقييد «لابيه» بـ «آزر» حتى لايتوهم أن المقصود من أبيه هو أبيه الذي هو من صلبه واسمه «تارخ» ، إذ الاجماع بين الامامية قائم على أن آباء الانبياء من الصلب لايمكن ان يكونوا من المشركين ، وآزر هو عم ابراهيم كما في بعض الروايات الوارد عن أهل البيت عليهم السلام .

فلو كان المقصود من الشهور المذكورة في الاية هي الشهور الزمانية التي عند البشر لكان حق التعبير أن يكون « إن عدة الشهور اثنا عشر شهراً  » ، فإضافة قيد «عند الله» شاهد على أن المقصود من الشهور ليس التي عندنا ، وهذا مانفهمه من هذا القيد في آيات أُخر ، كالايات الاتية :

1 / ( إن الذين عند ربك لايستكبرون عن عبادته ) ([4][5])  .

2 / ( ماعندكم ينفد وماعند الله باق ) ([5][6])  .

3 / ( فإن استكبروا فالذين عند ربك يسبحون له بالليل والنهار ) ([6][7])  .

4 / ( وإن من شيء إلا عندنا خزائنه وما ننزله إلا بقدر معلوم ) ([7][8]) .

5 / ( وإن يوماً عند ربك كألف سنة مما تعدون ) ([8][9])  .

فهذا القيد «عند» في هذه الايات احترازا عن غير الذي أضيف إليه .

القرينة الثانية  :

التعبير بقوله ( في كتاب الله يوم خلق السماوات والارض ) ومعنى ذلك أن لهذه الشهور تحقق مع خلق السماوات والارض ، والشهور القمرية متحققة بعد خلق السماوات والارض ، إذ هي نتاج دوران القمر حول الارض .

إن قلت : إن عدة الشهور اثنا عشر شهراً تتألف منها السنون ، وهذه العدة هي التي في علم الله سبحانه ، وهي التي أثبتها في كتاب التكوين يوم خلق السماوات والارض واجرى الحركات العامة التي منها حركة الشمس وحركة القمر حول الارض وهي الاصل الثابت في الكون لهذه العدة ([9][10])  ، فمعنى ( في كتاب الله ) أي في علم الله ، وإذا كان كذلك فلا تحقق عيني واقعي تكويني لهذه الاشهر الزمانية قبل خلق السماوات والارض ، بل لها تحقق علمي .

قلت : كتاب الله على نمطين :

كتاب تدويني كالصحف والدفاتر التي تضبط فيها المعاني عن طريق خطوط ونقوش تدل عليها ([10][11])  ، وكتاب تكويني واقعي حقيقي .

واشير الى الاول بقوله تعالى ( وكتبنا له في الالواح من كل شيء موعظة وتفصيلا لكل شيء ) ([11][12])  وقوله ( رسول من الله يتلو صحفاً مطهرة فيها كتب قيّمة ) ([12][13])  .

واشير الى الثاني بقوله ( وكل شيء احصيناه في امام مبين ) وهذا الاحصاء تكويني واقعي حقيقي ، فعالم الامكان ـ وما سوى الخالق ـ بأكمله كتاب الله التكويني الواقعي الحقيقي ، ويسبق هذا الكتاب من حيث الرتبة كتاب علمي تدويني ، يكون الكتاب التكويني الواقعي مطابقاً له مطابقة تامة .

والمقصود من « كتاب الله » في الاية الكريمة هو الكتاب التكويني الواقعي ، لا التدويني العلمي ، وعليه فيكون للشهور الاثني عشر تحققاً خارجياً مع خلق السماوات والارض ، وهذا التحقق طبعاً مطابقاً لما في الكتاب التدويني العلمي السابق على خلق السماوات والارض .

والشاهد عليه : انه لو كان المقصود منه الكتاب العلمي ، وأن الاشهر الاثني عشر في علم الله ، فَلِمَ خصّص هذا العلم الالهي بيوم خلق السماوات والارض ، إذ ما من شيء متحقق في عالم الاعيان إلا وهو مسبوق بالعلم الالهي قبل خلق السماوات والارض ، فلا يكون هناك معنى جديد في الاية  ، فلا فائدة من حصر العلم آنذاك بالاشهر الاثني عشر ، إذ ما من شيء إلا وهو مسبوق بالعلم الالهي قبل ومع وبعد ذلك اليوم .

وبتعبير آخر : صريح الاية أن الاشهر لها تحقق يوم خلق السماوات والارض ، وظاهرها نفي التحقق قبل ذلك اليوم لمكان التقييد ([13][14])  ، فنسأل أنفسنا هل هذا التحقق تحقق علمي ام عيني ، إن كان الاول ـ وهو العلمي ـ فيستلزم نسبة الجهل له تعالى قبل ذلك اليوم وهو محال ، فيتعين الثاني وأن للاشهر الاثني عشر تحقق واقعي عيني يوم خلق الله السماوات والارض .

فلو كان المراد من الكتاب المذكور في الاية هو الكتاب العلمي للزم نسبة الجهل إليه تعالى ، ولكن التالي باطل فالمقدم مثله ، وإما بيان الملازمة وبطلان التالي فيتضح مما تقدم من الكلام .

القرينة الثالثة  :

وصف الاشهر الاثني عشر أو الاربعة الحرم ([14][15])  بأنها ديناً قيّماً ، والزمان امر موهوم لاوجود له في الخارج ، فليس هنالك شيء عيني في الخارج يشار له بالزمان ، فليس إلا السماوات والارض وحركتهما ، ومن حركتهما ينتزع الزمان ، ولذلك عرف الزمان : بانه مقدار الحركة ، فزمان كل موجود هو حركة ذاته .

قال العلامة الطباطبائي قدس سره : إن التشبث بالزمان لم يقتصر على البحث الفلسفي ، بل يقيس البشر منذ ايامه الاولى فعالياته ـ التي هي حركات مختلفة ـ بواسطة الزمان ، فيطبقها على اليوم والشهر والسنة ، ويتخذ مبدأ للتاريخ أيضا ، نقيس الحركات الصغيرة نسبياً بقطع اليوم والليلة  ، نظير « من الفجر الى الضحى » « ومن الضحى حتى الغروب  » «  ومن طلوع نجمة الفجر حتى شروق الشمس » .

وقد اتخذ الانسان المتمدن من «الساعة» التي تتطابق حركاتها مع حركة اليوم والليلة اداة لقياس الزمان ، كالساعة اليدوية ، والساعة الرملية ، والساعة الشمسية ، واخيراً الساعة الاعتيادية ، واليوم تقاس اصغر الحركات ، واقصى مايمكن للحس ضبطه ، ولم يهدأ الناس العاديون في هذا المجال فهم يقيسون فيما بينهم بفطرتهم الحركات الصغيرة جدا بعضها على بعض ، ونقوم نحن أيضا بالفطرة احياناً بقياس الحركات الصغيرة «  بمقدار شربة ماء » « بمقدار أن تقوم وتقعد » «بمقدار رمشة عين » .

عبر التأمل في هذه القياسات نقف على الحقيقة التالية : إن الانسان باستعداده الفطري يتخذ حركة معينة مقياساً ، بغية تحديد سرعة وبطء وطول وقصر الحركات ، يقيس الحركة بوحدة الحركة ، وهي «الزمان» ، كما يقيس الاطوال بوحدة الطول ، والوزن بوحدة الوزن وكل شيء بوحدته ... ([15][16])  .

وخلاصة : الزمان أمر وهمي منتزع من حركة الاعراض والجواهر ، فهو مرتبط بالحركة ، والحركة من لوازم المادة ، فالمجردات لاحركة لها وما لاحركة له لازمان له .

وعليه : فمن المستحيل أن يكون الزمان «ديناً قيّما» إذ الدين امر تكويني واقعي عيني ، ليس مرتبطاً بعالم المادة وإنما مرتبط بكل العوالم الامكانية بكافة درجاتها وأصقاعها الوجودية : المادية ، والمثالية ، والعقلية ، وبتعبير آخر عرفاني : الناسوت ، والملكوت ، والجبروت ، واللاهوت .

إن قلت : الدين كما يطلق على مجموع ما انزله الله على أنبيائه ، يطلق على بعضها ، فالمعنى أن تحريم الاربعة من الشهور القمرية هو الدين الذي يقوم بمصالح العباد ، كما يشير إليه قوله ( جعل الله الكعبة البيت الحرام قياماً للناس والشهر الحرام ) ([16][17])  ، فليس الزمان هو الموصوف بالدين القيم ، وانما حرمة القتال في الاشهر المحرّمة هي الدين القيم أي من الدين القيم ، تسمية الجزء باسم الكل ، كتسمية الانسان بالرقبة في قوله تعالى ( فعتق رقبة مؤمنة ) .

قلت : أولا : ليس قوله تعالى ( ذلك الدين القيّم ) راجع فقط الى الاربعة الحرم ، بل هو ـ كما استظهرناه ـ راجع الى الاشهر الاثني عشر بأكلمها .

وثانياً : إطلاق لفظ «الدين» والقصد منه حكماً من أحكامه ، مجاز بحاجة الى قرينة وعلاقة مصححة لهذا الاستعمال المجازي .

وتوضيح ذلك ـ على ماذكر أهل البلاغة والمعاني ـ : أن الالفاظ المستعملة في المعاني إما أن يكون الاستعمال فيها على نحو الحقيقة أو على نحو المجاز .

فالاستعمال الحقيقي للفظ : هو استعمال اللفظ فيما وضع له ، فمثلا العرب وضعت «للحيوان المتفرس» لفظ الاسد ، فإذا قال الانسان : رأيت أسداً ، ويقصد به الحيوان المفترس ، فاستعماله لهذه اللفظة «أسد» استعمالا حقيقياً .

والاستعمال المجازي للفظ : هو استعمال اللفظ فيما لم يوضع له ، فإذا قيل : رأيت أسداً يرمي ، وقصد من لفظة «أسد» الرجل الشجاع ، فهذا الاستعمال استعمال مجازي ، إذ لفظة «الاسد» لم توضع للرجل الشجاع ، وإنما وضعت للحيوان المفترس .

ويشترط في الاستعمال المجازي شرطان :

الاول : وجود القرينة على هذا الاستعمال ، ومع عدمها ينصرف المعنى الى المعنى الحقيقي ، فإذا قيل : رأيت أسداً ، وشككنا هل مقصود المتكلم الرجل الشجاع او الحيوان المفترس ، الاصل عند الدوران بين المعنى الحقيقي والمعنى المجازي حمل الاستعمال على المعنى الحقيقي ، نعم إذا قيل : رأيت أسداً يرمي ، فكلمة «يرمي» قرينة على أن المقصود من الاسد هو الرجل الشجاع ، فينصرف اللفظ عن المعنى الحقيقي .

الثاني : وجود العلاقة المصححة بين المعنى الحقيقي والمعنى المجازي ، وقد ذكر البلاغيون مايقرب من خمسة وعشرين علاقة تصحح المجاز اللغوي منها :

1 /  علاقة الكل والجزء ، وهي أن يذكر الكل ويراد منه جزؤه ، نحو قوله تعالى ( يجعلون أصابعهم في آذانهم ) والاصبع لايوضع كله في الاذن وانما طرفه فحسب .

2 / الجزئية ، وهي أن يذكر جزء الشيء ويراد كله ، نحو قوله تعالى ( فتحرير رقبة مؤمنة ) ، وقول الشاعر :

وكم علمته نظم القوافي***فلما قال فاقية رماني

حيث عبر عن الشعر بالقافية التي هي آخر كلمة منه .

3 /  علاقة العموم ، كقوله تعالى ( أم يحسدون الناس ) والمقصود منه بعض الناس ، فاطلق العام وهو الناس واريد منه بعض الناس .

ويمكن أن نسمي هذه العلاقة بعلاقة الكلية والجزئية ، وهي تختلف عن علاقة الكل والجزء ، إذ وجود الجزئي وجود للكلي ، فالانسان كلي وزيد مصداق وجزئي له ، ووجود زيد وجود للانسان ، بخلاف العلاقة بين الكل والجزء ، فوجود الجزء لايستلزم وجود الكل ، فإذا تحققت كل الاجزاء تحقق الكل ، فالكل عدم عند عدم أحد أجزائه ، بخلاف الكلي فإنه يتحقق بوجود أحد مصاديقه الجزئية .

الى آخر العلائق المذكورة في كتب أهل البلاغة والمعاني فراجع .

وعليه : فاستعمال الدين والمراد منه بعض أحكامه ، هو استعمال مجازي ، والعلاقة المصححة لهذا الاستعمال هي علاقة الكل والجزء ، باطلاق الكل وارادة الجزء ، وقد ذكر أهل البلاغة والمعاني أنه يشترط في صحة هذه العلاقة أن يكون الجزء المقصود منه اللفظ يشكل ركناً من اركان الكل ، أما إذا كان جزءاً من ألف جزء ـ مثلا ـ فلا يصحح الاستعمال المجازي .

فعلاقة الكل والجزء ليس كعلاقة العموم ـ اي الكلية والجزئية ـ اذ الكل عدم عند عدم أحد أجزائه ، فلا بد من تمامية الاجزاء حتى يتحقق الكل ، بينما الكلي ينوجد ويتحقق بتحقق أحد أفراده ومصاديقة ، كمفهوم الانسان فانه كلي يتحقق في الخارج بتحقق أحد مصاديقه وأفراده ، فتحقق زيد هو تحقق للانسان ، بخلاف ـ مثلا ـ الطائرة لاتحقق لها إلا بتحقق جميع أجزائها أو الاجزاء المهمة فيها .

وإن ابيت ذلك فنقول : حسب الاستعمال القراني لكلمة «الدين» فإنها لم تستعمل في حكم من الاحكام الفرعية الجزئية ودونك المعجم المفهرس لالفاظ القرآن الكريم ، اما تقييد الدين بكونه قيّماً فلم تستعمل إلا فيما هو أصل من أصول الدين ، فهناك خمس آيات في القرآن الكريم قيّدت الدين بأنه قيّماً وهي :

1 /  ( أمر ألا تعبدوا إلا اياه ذلك الدين القيم ) ([17][18])  .

2 /  ( فأقم وجهك للدين حنيفاً فطرت الله التي فطر الناس عليها لاتبديل لخلق الله ذلك الدين القيم ولكن أكثر الناس لايعلمون * منيبين إليه واتقوه وأقيموا الصلاة ولاتكونوا من المشركين ) ([18][19])  .

3 /  ( قل سيروا في الارض فانظروا كيف كان عاقبة الذين من قبل كان أكثرهم مشركين * فَأَقم وجهك للدين القيم من قبل أن يأتي يومٌ لامردّ له من الله يومئذ يصدعون ) ([19][20])  .

4 /  ( وما امرروا إلا ليعبدوا الله مخلصين له الدين حنفاء ويقيموا الصلاة ويؤتوا الزكاة وذلك دين القيّمة ) ([20][21])  .

5 /  ( قل انني هداني ربي الى صراط مستقيم ديناً قيماً ملة ابراهيم حنيفاً وما كان من المشركين ) ([21][22])  .

وفي جميع هذه الايات ليس المقصود من الدين القيم حكماً من الاحكام الفرعية الجزئية ، بل اريد من الدين القيّم أصول الدين ، ومنه تعرف أن هذه الاشهر الاثني عشر التي عُبّر عنها بأنها ديناً قيماً لابد وان تكون مرتبطة بأصل من أصول الدين ، ورحم الله من فسر القرآن بالقرآن ، وفهم القرآن بالقرآن ، واستوعب القرآن بالقرآن ، وعرف كلمات القرآن بالقرآن ، كل ذلك بإعانة من القرآن الناطق عليه السلام .

Now another hadith:

4 / المفيد : حدثنا الصدوق حدثنا محمد بن موسى بن المتوكل عن محمد بن ابي عبدالله الكوفي عن موسى بن عمران ([31][33])  عن عمه الحسين بن يزيد عن علي بن سالم عن ابيه علن سالم بن دينار عن سعد بن طريف عن الاصبغ بن نباتة قال : سمعت ابن عباس يقول : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه واله : ذكر الله عز وجل عبادة ، وذكري عبادة ، وذكر علي عبادة ، وذكر الائمة من ولده عبادة ، والذي بعثني بالنبوة وجعلني خير البرية ، إن وصي لافضل الاوصياء ، وإنه لحجة الله على عباده ، وخليفته على خلقه ، ومن ولده الائمة الهداة بعدي ، بهم يحبس الله عن أهل الارض ، وبهم يمسك السماء ان تقع على الارض إلا بإذنه ، وبهم يمسك السماء ان تميد بهم ، وبهم يسقى خلقه الغيث ، وبهم يخرج النبات ، أولئك أولياء الله حقاً وخلفاؤه صدقاً ، عدتهم عدة الشهور ، وهي اثنا عشر شهراً ، وعدتهم عدة نقباء موسى بن عمران عليه السلام ، ثم تلا هذه الاية ( والسماء ذات البروج ) ، ثم قال : اتُقَدِّر ـ يابن عباس ـ أن الله يقسم بالسماء ذات البروج ، ويعني به السماء وبروجها ؟ قلت : يارسول الله ، فما ذاك ، قال : اما السماء فأنا ، واما البروج فالائمة بعدي ، أولهم علي وآخرهم المهدي ([32][34])  .

You have been fixed & nailed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

So, the level of logic has boiled down to this. 

The Qur'an says: 

The number of months in the sight of Allah is twelve (in a year)- so ordained by Him the day He created the heavens and the earth; of them four are sacred: that is the straight usage. So wrong not yourselves therein, and fight the Pagans all together as they fight you all together. {Al-Tawbah: 36}

Therefore, twelve Imams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Cool said:

إن عدة الشهور عند الله اثنا عشر شهرا في كتاب الله يوم خلق السماوات والأرض

وَلَقَدْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ بَنِي إِسْرَآئِيلَ وَبَعَثْنَا مِنهُمُ اثْنَيْ عَشَرَ نَقِيبًا

etc......

Thus the statement of the Hadith and the  analysis of the verses of Quran reveal the truth for following the 12 Imams and their followers are felicitousٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ

The details inline with the verses of quran and hadith can be seen at the given link:

Moreover we do have  hadith verified  inline with  the verses of quran to reveal the confirmation of 12 Imams from the purified progeny of the prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), the details are given below:

9. *** آية التطهير ***

" إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرا"

The arabic text provides the evidence that the text has been structured using exactly 14 Alphabets that have dots.

The  number of alphabets / letters in verse of purification is 47 as mentioned below:

ا ن م ا ی ر ی  د ا ل ل ہ ل ی ز ہ ب ع ن ک م ا ل ر ج س ا ہ ل  ا ل  ب ی ت و ی ط ہ ر ک م ت ط ہ ی ر ا.

Now  we calculate the number of alphabets/letters in the names of Ahl al-Bayt (p) and they are:

علي = 3 حروف (ع ل ی)

فاطمة = 5 حروف (ف ا ط م ہ )

حسن = 3 حروف (ح س ن)

حسين = 4 حروف (ح س ی ن)

علي = 3 حروف (ع ل ی)

محمد = 4 حروف (م ح م د)

جعفر = 4 حروف (ج ع ف ر)

موسى = 4 حروف (م و س ی)

علي = 3 حروف (ع ل ی)

محمد = 4 حروف (م ح م د)

علي = 3 حروف (ع ل ی)

حسن = 3 حروف (ح س ن)

محمد = 4 حروف (م ح م د)

المجموع 47

10.- If we carry on and look the Sura  number 47 placed in the Quran every one with receptive mind is surprised to know that the name of this Sura is Muhammad .

 This is the name of the prophet saw thus confirming that the verse of purification has a central place to exhibit the 14 infallibles including the prophet chosen by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). No one else has this respect and virtues.

The Quran has one Sura for explaining the specific concept of Tauheed / oneness of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). This is named as Sura Tauheed / Al Ikhlas, it is placed at number 112. It has 4 verses. The Arabic text of these 4 verses is quoted below:

 قُلْ هُوَ ٱللَّهُ أَحَدٌ {١} ٱللَّهُ ٱلصَّمَدُ {٢} لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ {٣} وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُۥ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌۢ {٤}

The separate alphabets of these verses are given below:

ق ل ہ و ا ل ل ہ ا ح د۔ ا ل ل ہ ا ل ص م د۔ ل م ی ل د و ل م ی و ل د ۔ و ل م ی ک ن ل ہ ک ف و ا ا ح د۔

And another astonishing truth comes here that sum of letters of these verses is exactly  47

11. Further if we take the letters out of 47 letters used in Sura Tauheed the following letters are used in its Arabic text:

ق ل ہ و ا ح د ص م ی ک ن ف

The count of these letters without repetition is exactly 13 which is equal to the number of Infallibles including 12 Imams and the daughter of the prophet Muhammad saww Fatima Zahra SA, from the progeny of the prophet.

Thus proving the connection of Ahl albaayt AS leading towards the Prophet Muhammad saww for the path leading towards true Tauheed of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

wasalam

Edited by Muslim2010
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...