Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

A Zaydi Response to Ammar Nakshawani


Zaidism

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, Most Merciful

There has been a recent lecture by Ammar Nakshawani in which he was addressing the attack on the door of Lady Fatima (upon her be peace). He mentioned how the Twelvers were moving towards the Zaidiyyah, and in doing so he sought to point towards what he deemed to be a ‘‘Zaydi opinion’’ regarding the incident of the door.

Now, whether he mentioned this ‘‘Zaydi opinion’’ as a means to gather Qara’in, or add to it certain undertones as well. Such as pointing the finger towards the Zaydis, and their admirers by seeking to highlight that they believe such an attack was orchestrated against Lady Fatima, and in doing so question the stance of the Zaidiyyah as one being feeble, and inconsistent with an act of clear injustice; sort of how we see the case with those who love Imam Ali, and send their blessings, or at least halt on Muawiyah (l.a).

Perhaps, insinuating to those Zaydi admirers that such inconsistencies, and blunders that are present among them may indeed be grounds for further questioning other things, such as their inclination towards the textually and logically coherent Imamah that the Zaidiyyah believe in.

We of course encourage our Sunni, Twelver, and Isma’ili brethren to scrutinize the fundamentals (Usul) of their beliefs, and ours. We invite them to read our works, and ask us what our position is instead of taking it here and there from the mouths of lecturers, polemicists, and those who Allah knows of regarding their intentions, as we do not question the sincerity of others, but we do point towards the blatant ignorance, and errancy of some.

That being said, we would like to kindly correct Ammar Nakshawani in mentioning the position of al-Imam al-Hadi ilal-Haq Yahya b. al-Hussein b. al-Qasim b. Ibrahim b. Isma’il b. Ibrahim b. al-Hassan b. al-Hassan b. ‘Ali (upon them be peace).

There are two books under the title of Tathbit al-Imamah which are attributed to al-Imam al-Hadi (upon him be peace), one of them begins with: {الحمد لله الذي خلق السموات والأرض وجعل الظلمات والنور ثم الذين كفروا بربهم يعدلون}

And the other begins with {إن سأل سائل أو تعنت متعنت جاهل عن تثبيت إمامة أمير المؤمنين علي بن أبي طالب رضوان الله عليه}

The former one is the book which Ammar Nakshawani quoted ‘the Zaydi opinion’ from.

I ask, before speaking on behalf of the Zaidiyyah did Ammar Nakshawani look for an Isnad for that book? If so, did he realize that it was mentioned with no Isnad whatsoever, and as a historian, and researcher he must certainly know that the Zaydi school is one which is known for its great Asanid, and the works of al-Imam al-Hadi (such as the Tathbit al-Imamah which is found in his Majmu’) all have Asanid that are mentioned by the great scholars, and Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt. Such as al-Imam ‘Abdullah b. Hamza who is also the author of one of the best classical works in refuting the illogical, and inconsistent belief of occult Imamah. Or, al-Imam Majd al-Din al-Mu’ayidi who recorded the many Asanid of the Zaidiyyah in works such as Lawam’i al-Anwar, and others.

Did Ammar Nakshawani at least seek to see whether the scholars of the Zaidiyyah consider the work he quoted as one which is reliable even if it did not have an Isnad? I am afraid that such is clearly not the case. He seems to have considerably mentioned that there are scholars among the Twelver school who do not believe in the incident of the door, but they do believe in the injustice that Lady Fatima (upon her be peace) faced, and this is something no Zaydi would deny. So, we ask why fingers are being inconsiderately pointed towards the Zaydis on an issue which clearly has not been considerably looked into, and a matter which is not sorted out in your own homes so to speak.

Moreover, I would like to speculate over what Ammar Nakshawani possibly relied on as evidence to utilize this work as a denoter of ‘the Zaydi opinion’ it appears that in the beginning of the treatise which is titled Tathbit al-Imamah (yet seldom touches on the topic of Imamah) it presents an introduction by the researcher of the book (who is not a Zaydi) wherein he mentions that he consulted the original manuscript after he found some mistakes in the present one, and sought to reconcile these issues and thereafter presented the piece which was quoted. However, we ask, is that manuscript which the Muhaqqiq consulted one which carries an Isnad back to al-Imam al-Hadi?

We are angry, and saddened as Imam al-Qasim states towards what the Ahl al-Bayt, and Lady Fatima had to endure. However, we will not go to cheap sectarian attempts so as to furthermore pronounce these injustices, or embellish them with questionable occurrences which are rejected, and controversial in one’s own school (Twelver School).

In the future we aim to present the Zaydi position regarding the right of Fatima (upon her be peace) when it comes to Fadak, and the extent of what could be said regarding the incident of the door. Just know, a lion like the Prince of the Believers would never allow someone like Khalid to attack her, as al-Imam Zayd states ‘she was most dear to her family to have such occur to her’’. Of course, further attempts to muddy the waters in order to address this issue is something one can use for their own followers, however, when you step on the grounds of the Zaidiyyah know that you are dealing with a Taqiyyah free Ahl al-Bayt, and know that you are dealing with the unadulterated version of the great Imam al-Sadiq, and Imam al-Baqir.

As for the previous attempt to ignorantly highlight that Imam al-Qasim (upon him be peace) insulted al-Hadi al-Naqi is something which we aim to address in the future inshaAllah, and we would also like to note that emotional rhetoric will not serve in proving an unfeasible belief in Imamah.

The Ahl al-Bayt have been hurt for too long, and it is often stated that the Muslims do not want to speak about what happened in Karbala, what happened after the Prophet (upon him and his Ahl al-Bayt be peace). However, we would like to say that opening the door after Karbala is something which many do not want to get into. For, when you bring up such great members from the progeny, such as al-Imam Zayd, al-Imam al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah, al-Imam al-Hussein al-Fakhi, al-Imam Muhammad b. Ja’far al-Sadiq, al-Imam ‘Abdullah b. al-Hassan b. al-Hassan (who the Twelvers slander) and his righteous sons many questions begin to arise.

Did al-Imam al-Sadiq really conceal his Imamah from his own sons, yet reveal it to the likes of Zurarah, Shaytan al-Taq, the two Hishams, and others who seemed to have lost their course after his death?

As one draws a dichotomy between the Zaidiyyah and the Twelvers they will come to see that the story presented by the Twelvers is one which is inconsistent with history, inconsistent with the Qur’an, and inconsistent with reality. This monopoly over the Ahl al-Bayt will soon end InshaAllah, and we pray more brothers will come to see the reality of the Ahl al-Bayt, how they aren’t cowards seeking to appease their Abbasid rulers, and how any persecution they faced was by virtue of their Taqiyyah-free Zaydi ‘Aqeedah that their sons, and their cousins were upon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/22/2021 at 12:29 PM, Zaidism said:

al-Imam ‘Abdullah b. al-Hassan b. al-Hassan (who the Twelvers slander) and his righteous sons many questions begin to arise.

Salam this is your fallcy which you deny  Imamate of righteous  persons after Imam Sadiq(عليه السلام) from his lineage but on the other hand you accept Imamate a liar from lineage of Imam  Sadiq(عليه السلام) while ironically  you deny having a successor for Imam Sadiq(عليه السلام) 

On 12/22/2021 at 12:29 PM, Zaidism said:

In the future we aim to present the Zaydi position regarding the right of Fatima (upon her be peace) when it comes to Fadak, and the extent of what could be said regarding the incident of the door. Just know, a lion like the Prince of the Believers would never allow someone like Khalid to attack her, as al-Imam Zayd states ‘she was most dear to her family to have such occur to her’’. Of course, further attempts to muddy the waters in order to address this issue is something one can use for their own followers, however, when you step on the grounds of the Zaidiyyah know that you are dealing with a Taqiyyah free Ahl al-Bayt, and know that you are dealing with the unadulterated version of the great Imam al-Sadiq, and Imam al-Baqir.

 

On 12/22/2021 at 12:29 PM, Zaidism said:

We are angry, and saddened as Imam al-Qasim states towards what the Ahl al-Bayt, and Lady Fatima had to endure. However, we will not go to cheap sectarian attempts so as to furthermore pronounce these injustices, or embellish them with questionable occurrences which are rejected, and controversial in one’s own school (Twelver School).

attacking to house of Imam Ali(عليه السلام) & lady Fatima(sa) & martyrying  of lady Fatima(sa) by three sunni caliphs & their comrades is an undeniable  fact which even has been confirmed  from sunni sources is not muddy at all except  for wahabists & Nasibis who deny whole of it or slandering  Imam Ali(عليه السلام) by accusing him to cowardinece which only person who go to cheap sectarian attempts  is you which you always try to show your own version of Zaydism as superior & true sect by slandering  shia Imams especially Imam Sadiq(عليه السلام) & Imam Hasan Askari(عليه السلام) & calling their revered companions & followers with abusive  languge & calling them as  ally of Abbasidsbut on the other hand you choose  Jafar the liar who has been  traitor & liar as your Imam .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Psychological Warfare
Quote

This monopoly over the Ahl al-Bayt will soon end

I am leaving among you the Two Weighty Things: the Book of Allah and my `Itrat (Progeny), my Ahlul Bayt. So long as you (simultaneously) uphold both of them, you will never be misled after me; so, do not go ahead of them else you should perish, and do not lag behind them else you should perish; do not teach them, for they are more knowledgeable than you.1

-----

Ahlul Bayth ( 2) are the "Al-Qur'an an-natiq" means the "speaking Qur'an." 3

-----

Others are Just Jurists/political leaders appointed by men as " imam "  and the definition of Ahlul Bayth expanded to include fallible man, i.e their representatives Not Allah(عزّ وجلّ) Representatives. 

Runs contrary to the Hadith of Muhammad Al- Mustafa ( Peace be upon him and his pure progeny). 

and 

Qur'an 97:4

تَنَزَّلُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ وَالرُّوحُ فِيهَا بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ مِنْ كُلِّ أَمْرٍ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 12/22/2021 at 1:29 PM, Zaidism said:

This monopoly over the Ahl al-Bayt will soon end

Our days on this Earth are numbered...hyperbolic message received (sarcasm)

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...