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

Zaydi - Twelver (Debate) 3

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

For anyone interested in debating/discussing the floor is yours, if you would like to defend a particular issue, or challenge us on a matter it is completely up to you. However, we would like to stick to the point chosen for debate. 

@Ansar Shiat Ali @layman @Abu Nur @313_Waiter @Mahdavist @Zainuu

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Before anyone initiates the debate can we all agree to coherently structure our arguments? I.e. if you are going to post a Quranic verse or hadith please also attach an explanation or interpretation to it so we understand your standpoint. As we have seen there are many Quranic verses/ahadith that can be used to defend either side so it’s important for the truth seeker to identify how and for what purpose said verse/narration was used as proof for either creed.

Thanks God bless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Thank you brother, that is indeed the goal. We are hoping for some fruitful discussions in relation to these two traditions, and of course we expect that everyone  presents their proofs, arguments, and contentions with clear and coherent sources; so as to be genuine when discussing each other's creeds and create a sense of familiarity in respect to where each individual is coming from via their premises and conclusions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Here are some debate propositions which one can argue for/against 

•  ‘ilm Al-Ghayab 

• Occult Imamate 

• The designation of 9 particular Imams after Imam Hussein عليه السلام 

• Which sect follows the Ahlulbayt 

• Infallibility 

•  Tradition 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Al-Salamu alykum.

I am not here to debate, but ask questions. 

Did Zayd Ibn Ali (عليه السلام) claim Imamah? If so, bring proof.

Did anyone of Zayd's time acknowledge his Imamah? If so bring, Who? Also bring proof for this.

Did any of the 9 Imams after al-Husayn (عليهم السلام) acknowledge the Imamah of Zayd (عليه السلام)? If so, bring proof.

Edited by Ansar Shiat Ali
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
54 minutes ago, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

Al-Salamu alykum.

Wa 'Alaykum Al-Salam wa-rahmatullah

55 minutes ago, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

I am not here to debate, but ask questions. 

Kindly post your questions here brother:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Ansar Shiat Ali said:

Did Zayd Ibn Ali (عليه السلام) claim Imamah?

Salam Brother!!

كفاية الأثر(:ص296 ـ 297):. عن أبي بكير انه قال لزيد: يا بن رسول الله هل عهد إليكم رسول الله متى يقوم قائمكم؟ قا: (يا أبا بكير انك لن تلحقه وان هذا الأمر يليه ستة أوصياء من بعد هذا وأشار إلى الباقر ثم يجعل الله خروج قائمنا فيملأها قسطاً وعدلا كما ملئت ظلماً وجوراً قلت يا ابن رسول الله الست صاحب هذا الأمر؟ فقال: انا من العترة...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Ansar Shiat Ali Your questions have been answered on the thread.

22 minutes ago, Cool said:

ستة أوصياء من بعد هذا وأشار إلى الباقر

Don't attribute lies to Imam Zayd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
50 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Don't attribute lies to Imam Zayd

روى ابن شهر آشوب في المناقب ان الامام زيد (عليه السلام) اشار إلى الإمام الباقر بأبيات وقال:

ثوى باقر العلم ملحد ***** امام الورى طيب المولد
فمن لي سوى جعفر بعده ***** امام الورى الاوحد الامجد
أبا جعفر الخير انت الامام ***** وانت المرجى لبلوى غد

ابن شهر آشوب، المناقب: 197، ط دار الأضواء، بيروت.

The reference of book has been given, I have not said something from my own. 

Furthermore, I have pointed out several times to you on different threads that your concept of Imamate is different from us. 

For you, your Imams are scholars. For us, Imams of Ahlul Bayt, those who are the bearers of divine covenant (2:124), are only 12. And your books too carries this fact:

التحف شرح الزلف) قال: (واعلم ان الله عزوجل جعل خلف النبوة من ابناء نبيه في اثنى عشر سبطاً، قال الإمام الرضا (عليه السلام) : ان الله عزوجل اخرج من بني إسرائيل يعقوب بن اسحاق بن ابراهيم اثنى عشر سبطاً، ثم عد الاثنى عشر من ولد إسرائيل، وكذلك اخرج من ولد الحسن والحسين اثنى عشر سبطاً... لا ينقطع عقبهم إلى انقطاع التكليف، وهم بمنزلة اسباط بني اسرائيل حجة الله على خلقه وأمان أهل الأرض من استيصال عذابه)

Another one:

وفي المجموعة الفاخرة للإمام الهادي ص221 (والاخيار من ذرية الحسن والحسين، أولهم علي بن الحسين وآخرهم المهدي ثم الائمة فيما بينهما)

في التحف شرح الزلف للسيد مجد الدين ايضاً

Perhaps you would need more references:

حديث الاثنى عشر في الاعتصام بحبل الله المتين المجلد الخامس باب السير والشافي للإمام عبدالله بن الحمزة الجزء الأول الصفحة140

وفي لوامع الأنوار المجلد الثاني الصفحة 493.
وفي الحدائق الوردية: (لا يزال هذا الأمر في قريش ما بقي منهم اثنان)

الحدائق الوردية في مناقب ائمة الزيدية: 222 تصنيف الفقيه أبي الحسن حسام الدين حميد بن أحمد المحامي 

In your creed, it is possible that there can emerge two Imams at the same time. And your scholars have give the fatwa that in such case one of them should be killed:

التحف شرح الزلف قال (ان الامام واحد لقيام الادلة عقلا ونقلا فأما العقل، فان قيام امامين موجب للاضطراب والفساد... وأما نقلا فلو لم يكن إلاّ الاجماع حول الامام الواحد والخلاف في غيره) ثم أورد الحديثين (من دعا إلى نفسه أو إلى غيره وهناك إمام فعليه لعنة الله...)

And

قول المنصور بالله (إذا بويع الخليفتان قتل الآخر منهما)

Yet we see in the history:

ان الامام الاطروش قام في زمن الامام الهادي

So there cannot be any debate with our zaidi brothers as long as they accept their Imams as mujtahids. 

We have a totally different concept of Imamate which is in accordance with the ahadith of 12 Leaders/Imams available in your books.

Wassalam!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Cool said:

Salam Brother!!

كفاية الأثر(:ص296 ـ 297):. عن أبي بكير انه قال لزيد: يا بن رسول الله هل عهد إليكم رسول الله متى يقوم قائمكم؟ قا: (يا أبا بكير انك لن تلحقه وان هذا الأمر يليه ستة أوصياء من بعد هذا وأشار إلى الباقر ثم يجعل الله خروج قائمنا فيملأها قسطاً وعدلا كما ملئت ظلماً وجوراً قلت يا ابن رسول الله الست صاحب هذا الأمر؟ فقال: انا من العترة...

 

wa alykum al salam wa rahmat allah. Thank you for the source

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Cool said:

 

For you, your Imams are scholars. For us, Imams of Ahlul Bayt, those who are the bearers of divine covenant (2:124), are only 12. 

The concept of 12 Imams infallible imams designated by Allah is a fundamental obligatory belief. But can only be followed through circular arguments, and blind following of your scholars.

Zaidi fundamentals can be proven through Qur'an and mutawatir hadith.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Cool said:

سبطاً

Not فرد, 

This narration by Imam Ridha is also found in Al-Khisal, I don't see the point you're trying to make, it is saying from the six sons of Imam Hassan, and the six sons of Imam Hussein the pure progeny will spread. The same way the sons of Israel were multiplied and spread, as Imam Ridha states, through اثنى عشر سبطاً

4 hours ago, Cool said:

وفي المجموعة الفاخرة للإمام الهادي ص221 (والاخيار من ذرية الحسن والحسين، أولهم علي بن الحسين وآخرهم المهدي ثم الائمة فيما بينهما)

Again, I don't see what point you're trying to make. It clearly says: من ذرية الحسن والحسين, from the progenies of Imam Hassan, and Imam Hussein. Obviously the Mahdi would be the last one? 

4 hours ago, Cool said:

In your creed, it is possible that there can emerge two Imams at the same time. And your scholars have give the fatwa that in such case one of them should be killed:

Correction: It is possible for more than one Fatimid Imam to rule in the world, however, if the dominion of one Imam is encompassed by another Imam, than you would have an Imam giving the entirety of the Hukm to only one Imam. 

If for whatever reason an Imam does not want to give up his hukm he will become a threat to the state. This is called living in the practical world, and having practical solutions. 

For example you Had Imam Nasir in Tabristan, and Imam Hadi in Yemen. Both were ruling at the same time, but if their rule would spread to the point they'd be covering the same area, one Imam would need to step down. 

4 hours ago, Cool said:

(إذا بويع الخليفتان قتل الآخر منهما

This means if both wanted to cling to their rule, the one who does not have the right to it after merging would obviously lose it. You can't have two Caliphs, it is perfectly logical and clear.

5 hours ago, Cool said:

ان الامام الاطروش قام في زمن الامام الهادي

I am sorry that you have to go to these desperate attempts to twist things, May Allah forgive and guide you. Insha'Allah as I already mentioned it is clear that more than one Imam ruling different provinces is fine.

5 hours ago, Cool said:

So there cannot be any debate with our zaidi brothers as long as they accept their Imams as mujtahids

My friend, your 12th Imam occupies no role whatsoever besides filling the gap for your Imamate. Therefore, your entire creed is in the hands of Mujtahids, what are you even saying at this point?

5 hours ago, Cool said:

We have a totally different concept of Imamate which is in accordance with the ahadith of 12 Leaders/Imams available in your books.

This is desperation and delusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
15 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

This narration by Imam Ridha is also found in Al-Khisal

lol, So 12 Imams from the "Progeny" of Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) & Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) (6 from each) & then where the first, second & third Imam went? 

It turned out to be 15 instead of twelve :hahaha:

Anyway , the hadith mentions that the progeny of Imam Hassan & Imam Hussain "spread" from which sons. And that's it. But in the mean time the hadith referred carries some important points which need to be addressed:

1:  ، وهم بمنزلة اسباط بني اسرائيل حجة الله على خلقه

2. وأمان أهل الأرض من استيصال عذابه

I guess none of your Imam (mijtahid) holds the title "hujjatullahe ala khalqeh" and none of them is the mitl of "amaana ahl al-ard". 

And what about the hadith of 12 caliphs? 

5 hours ago, Cool said:

حديث الاثنى عشر في الاعتصام بحبل الله المتين المجلد الخامس باب السير والشافي للإمام عبدالله بن الحمزة الجزء الأول الصفحة140

وفي لوامع الأنوار المجلد الثاني الصفحة 493.
وفي الحدائق الوردية: (لا يزال هذا الأمر في قريش ما بقي منهم اثنان)

الحدائق الوردية في مناقب ائمة الزيدية: 222 تصنيف الفقيه أبي الحسن حسام الدين حميد بن أحمد المحامي 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Again, I don't see what point you're trying to make

lol, let me clear it to you once again:

أولهم علي بن الحسين

This is Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) You don't consider him as your Imam or do you believe in his Imamate.

وآخرهم المهدي ثم الائمة فيما بينهما

So we do believe and accept that Zayd Shaheed was a faqih & mujtahid of his time. But he was not the bearer of divine covenant. Which passed on to Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) from Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) and then to from Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) to Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (عليه السلام). 

Checkmate Bro!!!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
35 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

My friend, your 12th Imam occupies no role whatsoever besides filling the gap for your Imamate

Who is the hujjah of Allah upon creation now?  Who is the one due to his existence earth & its ahl are existing? 

وفي تتمة الاعتصام يذكر حديث اثني عشر خليفة

تتمة الاعتصام: 5 / 400 ـ 402 (زيدي).

I am now playing in your ground my friend. So you need to defend your creed carefully. Here is another quote:

وفي التحف شرح الزلف قال: (ان الذرية يدخلون في لفظ أهل البيت (عليهم السلام) وان ذريتهم باقية إلى يوم القيامة، وانهم الحجة على الأمة بدليل حديث السفينة والأمان و..)

So for you every "Syed" is a hujjah of Allah upon ummah? lol are you really serious??? 

Every "Syed" you see is a saleh (pious) person? Every Syed is mithl of safinah? What a joke this is!!! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Cool said:

lol, So 12 Imams from the "Progeny" of Imam Hassan (عليه السلام) & Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) (6 from each) & then where the first, second & third Imam went? 

It turned out to be 15 instead of twelve :hahaha:.

You need to work on your etiquette when it comes to dialogue. 

Why are you asking me, when you are the one who quoted the Hadith?

5 hours ago, Cool said:

واعلم ان الله عزوجل جعل خلف النبوة من ابناء نبيه في اثنى عشر سبطاً، قال الإمام الرضا (عليه السلام) : ان الله عزوجل اخرج من بني إسرائيل يعقوب بن اسحاق بن ابراهيم اثنى عشر سبطاً، ثم عد الاثنى عشر من ولد إسرائيل، وكذلك اخرج من ولد الحسن والحسين اثنى عشر سبطاً

 From the sons of Imam Hassan, and from the sons of Imam Hussein they are اثنى عشر سبطاً

12/2 = 6

From those twelve, six from each side, the pure progeny was spread (in number), in the same manner that الله عزوجل اخرج من بني إسرائيل يعقوب بن اسحاق بن ابراهيم اثنى عشر سبطاً and cause Banu Israel to spread.

8 minutes ago, Cool said:

1:  ، وهم بمنزلة اسباط بني اسرائيل حجة الله على خلقه

i.e they have been favored over mankind. {Hadith Thaqalayn}

(2:47) Children of Israel! Recall My favour which I bestowed upon you, exalting you above all nations.

9 minutes ago, Cool said:

2. وأمان أهل الأرض من استيصال عذابه

This refers to the Hadith of the Holy Prophet ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) when he mentions that the Ahlulbayt are stars, and the Ahlulbayt are the ark of Noah ((عليه السلام))

11 minutes ago, Cool said:

And what about the hadith of 12 caliphs? 

There is no 12 Caliph Hadith in our works.

11 minutes ago, Cool said:

لا يزال هذا الأمر في قريش ما بقي منهم اثنان

What point are you seeking to make here?

14 minutes ago, Cool said:

أولهم علي بن الحسين

Yes, he ((عليه السلام)) is the first of the 6 سبط.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Cool said:

وفي التحف شرح الزلف قال: (ان الذرية يدخلون في لفظ أهل البيت (عليهم السلام) وان ذريتهم باقية إلى يوم القيامة، وانهم الحجة على الأمة بدليل حديث السفينة والأمان و..)

You need to read things contextually, this refers to those who are foremost in good deeds {35:32} 

This isn't a Hadith, I hope you know you're just quoting one of our scholars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

You need to work on your etiquette when it comes to dialogue. 

I think it is your frustration. And I was fearing that your relationship with me would get damaged if I tried to counter you. I already advised you not to indulge in debate with us but you are continuing to create thread after thread and inviting people for debate. Now bear it and don't complaint please. I will quote much more from your books if you asked for it.

7 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Why are you asking me, when you are the one who quoted the Hadith?

Why you are asking us after quoting ahadith from our books lol. Come on bro, I think I must stop now. I don't want to debate with you anymore.

Enjoy yourself!! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Just now, Cool said:

I will quote much more from your books if you asked for it.

I encourage it!

Just now, Cool said:

I don't want to debate with you anymore.

 

26 minutes ago, Cool said:

Checkmate Bro!!!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Zaidism said:

This means if both wanted to cling to their rule, the one who does not have the right to it after merging would obviously lose it. You can't have two Caliphs, it is perfectly logical and clear.

Yes it is logical to have one caliph at a time but your history tells something else:

إنه ظهر ثلاثة ائمة في وقت واحد في بلد واحد وهم المهدي والمنصور علي بن صلاح والهادي علي المؤيد

(المصدر السابق)

:D and you have the history of wars between your Imams, for instance:

الحروب بين ائمة الزيدية كالمنصور علي بن صلاح، والداعي، والامام المهدي أحمد بن يحيى المرتضى، وغيرهم وانقسام الناس بينهما والاشعار والسب بين المهدي وابن الوزير

( كتاب ائمة اليمن للعلامة زبارة )

The most devastating statement I came across in your book, is this:

في التحف شرح الزلف ص73 (قال زيد بن علي: ما فينا امام مفترض طاعته بعد الحسين...)

(We do not have an imam who is supposed to be obeyed after Hussain (عليه السلام)) 

A clear contradiction to the following:

أولهم علي بن الحسين

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mohsen
1 hour ago, Zaidism said:

I encourage it!

 

 

I don't understand why are you people debating on issues the imams themselves could not settle on at their own lifetime, let alone for us to debate and pass judgement on some 1000 years later.

It's clear that no one is going to be convinced otherwise in this once in a generation pandemic, and it's causing more fitnah than good. So, just agree to disagree and let Allah guide us all.

Salam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, Cool said:

Yes it is logical to have one caliph at a time but your history tells something else:

إنه ظهر ثلاثة ائمة في وقت واحد في بلد واحد وهم المهدي والمنصور علي بن صلاح والهادي علي المؤيد

(المصدر السابق)

:D and you have the history of wars between your Imams, for instance:

الحروب بين ائمة الزيدية كالمنصور علي بن صلاح، والداعي، والامام المهدي أحمد بن يحيى المرتضى، وغيرهم وانقسام الناس بينهما والاشعار والسب بين المهدي وابن الوزير

( كتاب ائمة اليمن للعلامة زبارة )

 

 

3 hours ago, Zaidism said:

If the dominion of one Imam is encompassed by another Imam, than you would have an Imam giving the entirety of the Hukm to only one Imam. 

If for whatever reason an Imam does not want to give up his hukm he will become a threat to the state. This is called living in the practical world, and having practical solutions. 

That’s what he’s saying, no? That if there are multiple people pining for caliphate, conflict will ensue. 

What I’m more concerned about is how those fighting for the caliphate settle this dispute among themselves? Since divine appointment is absent how is Imamate determined in this instance? And who will have the final say on the matter? The populace? Jurist? Tribes?

Edited by User 313
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
54 minutes ago, User 313 said:

That’s what he’s saying, no? That if there are multiple people pining for caliphate, conflict will ensue. 

Obviously there should be one Imam/Caliph at a time. But we see in history that there were three Imams of Zaidi's appeared simultaneously at the same time and same place.

إنه ظهر ثلاثة ائمة في وقت واحد في بلد واحد وهم المهدي والمنصور علي بن صلاح والهادي علي المؤيد

(المصدر السابق)

I don't currently know how they have settled the issue! 

Which two of them from al-Mehdi, al-Mansoor Ali bin Salah and al-Hadi Ali surrendered their claims to which one. As I am digging deeper into their history and books I am getting familiar with many contradictions within zaidiyyah. For instance, their definition of Imamate:

قال الإمام الهادي يحيى بن الحسين (لا تثبت الامامة لأحد إلاّ بدليل شرعي اجماعاً، وذلك لما كانت الامامة تابعة للنبوة، لان ثمرتها هي حفظ الشريعة وتقويمها... لم تكن إلاّ لمن اختاره الله واصطفاه وعلم طهارته وقيامه..)

عدة الاكياس في شرح معاني الاساس: 2 / 136

So here he mentions Imamate as:

a) تابعة للنبوة (follower of Prophecy)

b) لم تكن إلاّ لمن اختاره الله (Chosen by God

c) علم طهارته (and He knows his purity means Ismah perhaps)

Now another Imam gave this definition:

وقال الإمام أحمد بن سليمان في كتاب (حقائق المعرفة) (فقال أبو الجارود ومن قال بقوله من الزيدية علي وصي رسول الله(صلى الله عليه وآله) والامام بعده وان الامة كفرت وظلت في تركها بيعته ثم بعده الحسنان بالنص ثم هي بينهم شورى فمن خرج من أولادهما جامع الشروط للإمامة فهو امام...)

Adding conditions after Imam Hussain (عليه السلام), as Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has changed His sunnah (na'udobillah). 

We see in Quran:

سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا

33:62) (Such has been) the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah.

 فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا سُنَّتَ الْأَوَّلِينَ فَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَحْوِيلًا

35:43) Then should they wait for aught except the way of the former people? For you shall not find any alteration in the course of Allah; and you shall not find any change in the course of Allah

سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا

48:23) Such has been the course of Allah that has indeed run before, and you shall not find a change in Allah's course.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, User 313 said:

if there are multiple people pining for caliphate, conflict will ensue.

Yes, this is a possibility, albeit extremely rare. However, we have our means of addressing such situations if they do occur. Also, it isn't 'pinning for Caliphate' these two Imams, or 'Wali Faqihs' in relatable modern terms are already in power. 

5 hours ago, User 313 said:

What I’m more concerned about is how those fighting for the caliphate settle this dispute among themselves?

Imagine you have a Wali Faqih ruling Iraq, and a Wali Faqih ruling Iran. If these two nations would merge and they would become one country, logically one would need to step down.

6 hours ago, User 313 said:

how those fighting for the caliphate settle this dispute among themselves?

Nobody is 'fighting for the caliphate' the rulership of the Muslims is not an end, it is a means to establish justice. If someone wants to rule for their vain desires, they would be taken down. Again, this is a farfetched possibility. For example, you would agree it is possible for Sayyid Khamenei to turn against his people, or the WF after him, and one would ask the exact same questions as you would; of course, you'd say that it is too farfetched and even if it were to occur it would be addressed.

6 hours ago, User 313 said:

Since divine appointment is absent

This claim is incorrect, if anything it applies to the majority of the twelver Imams. In which the twelvers had to after 1,000+ establish the exact same system (WF) that (a) isn't orthodox, and (b) is exactly what this system of Zaydi rulership is. Therefore, any question, concern, qualm one may have can equally be directed to the system of WF.

6 hours ago, User 313 said:

how is Imamate determined

You mean who remains as the Imam of the Muslims (in ruling a government); first a committee would be established, for example they'd say whoever was first to rise remains the leader. If they rose at the same time, whoever is older, more fit, etc. There are many established means to arrive at who will rule over the new combined nations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, Cool said:

الحروب بين ائمة الزيدية كالمنصور علي بن صلاح، والداعي، والامام المهدي أحمد بن يحيى المرتضى، وغيرهم وانقسام الناس بينهما والاشعار والسب بين المهدي وابن الوزير

What do you make of this then @Zaidism?  Seems to me they were pining for the caliphate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, User 313 said:

What do you make of this then @Zaidism?  Seems to me they were pining for the caliphate?

Conflict especially during those times is possible, I don't think you've had an instance in medieval, or pre-medieval history where there isn't conflict.

One should layout all instances of Zaydi rulership and see for themselves how rare such conflicts were. If conflict may occur, should we stop seeking to establish justice and Islamic rulership? 

Wasn't there some conflict between Montazeri and Imam Khomeini, I can assure you if WF (somehow) existed in the earlier centuries you'd have the same issues. Of course, one would agree such rare instances shouldn't prompt throwing the baby out with the bathwater so to speak. 

We have testimony from Sunnis, and twelvers when it comes to the just and great rule of Imam Al-Nasir lil-haq

 وأما أبو محمد الناصر الكبير وهو: الحسن بن علي، ففضله في علمه وزهده وفقهه أظهر من الشمس الباهرة وهو الذي نشر الإسلام في الديلم حتى اهتدوا به بعد الضلالة، وعدلوا بدعائه عن الجهالة، وسيرته الجميلة أكثر من أن تحصى، وأظهر من أن تخفى، ومن أرادها أخذها من مظانها.

Source: http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/18_الناصريات-الشريف-المرتضى/الصفحة_61


They all (1 million sun worshippers) became Zaydis, and he established a Zaydi government.

Abu Muḥammad al-Ḥasan ibn ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan ibn ʿAlī ibn ʿUmar al-Ashraf ibn Alī Zayn al-ʿĀbidīn, better known as al-Ḥasan al-Uṭrūsh, was an Alid missionary of the Zaydi Shia sect who re-established Zaydi rule over the province of Tabaristan in northern Iran in 914, after fourteen years of Samanid rule.

Source: Madelung, W. "ʿALIDS OF ṬABARESTĀN, DAYLAMĀN, AND GĪLĀN". Encyclopaedia Iranica, Online Edition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Can I ask on what grounds Zaidis reject the infallibility of the 12 Imams? Can you also provide an overview of infallibility of consensus and why you espouse this concept?

Also, can my fellow Twelver brothers provide proof from hadith that infallibility extends to all 12 Imams, not just those in Ahlul Kisa? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, User 313 said:

Can I ask on what grounds Zaidis reject the infallibility of the 12 Imams? Can you also provide an overview of infallibility of consensus and why you espouse this concept?

Also, can my fellow Twelver brothers provide proof from hadith that infallibility extends to all 12 Imams, not just those in Ahlul Kisa? 

In summary hadith kisa is Mutawatir and only speaks about the 5.

After that you need to look exclusively to 12er sources which Zaidi do not except.

Interestingly there is a hadith  in a 12er book Bihar Anwar I think. Where Imam Jaffer Sadiq is asked directly who ayat tatheer reffers to .He mentions only 5. (I'll find the refferance)

So in Zaidi sources there is consensus but some confusion in 12er sources.

Also we disagree on the definition of infallibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, User 313 said:

 Can you also provide an overview of infallibility of consensus and why you espouse this concept?

 

I had an article about it on my shiachat blog before it was removed. I'll have to try and find it. And post it on the question and answer thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

 

10 hours ago, User 313 said:

Can I ask on what grounds Zaidis reject the infallibility of the 12 Imams? Can you also provide an overview of infallibility of consensus and why you espouse this concept?

Also, can my fellow Twelver brothers provide proof from hadith that infallibility extends to all 12 Imams, not just those in Ahlul Kisa? 

Salam, kindly post your questions on the Q&A thread and I, or brother @Ali bin Hussein Can get to you inshallah. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Mohamad Abdel-Hamid

We can have our debate/discussion here.

I purpose

1)We each use a classic scholar of our Madhab to define Imamat and compulsory belief regarding it. To give a standard aqeeda to work with.

2)Then we use Qur'an only without interpretation or tafsir. To lay the foundation.

3)Then we can move to Mutawatir hadith after agreeing on the standard. To aid in Tafseer.

then if we get to stage 3 without chaos we can decide on a step 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

Ok, but as I said, I won't be sure with absolute certainty if the information I post and the quotes and sources that I bring are 100% true (for us 12ers), so I'll try my best to post reliable information and if someone else reads my responses and sees something wrong, please correct me. I am afterall just a layman that will find most of my information from the internet, contrary to someone who has studied extensively the religion.

Edited by Mohamad Abdel-Hamid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

Ok, but as I said, I won't be sure with absolute certainty if the information I post and the quotes and sources that I bring are 100% true (for us 12ers), so I'll try my best to post reliable information and if someone else reads my responses and sees something wrong, please correct me. I am afterall just a layman that will find most of my information from the internet, contrary to someone who has studied extensively the religion.

I think that's very fair. Same for me please correct me if I'm wrong.

I think with the good attitude you have let's not try and proove each other wrong but explore our beleifs in a systematic way.

I think that will benefit everyone.

I'm happy to go first in defining our obligatory beliefs regarding Imamat. As the rest of our fundamentals are pretty much the same.

 

 

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...