Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Refuting Shaykh al-Mufid's Arguments for the Occultation


Zaidism

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
On 11/7/2022 at 2:22 AM, Zaidism said:

The preamble begins by mentioning the ontological necessity of an Imam, namely the Imam has to be infallible, and perfect so as to be able to guide in matters of religion. Now, let us apply S5 modal logic to this claim of necessity, I will concede the point on infallible guidance - the Zaydis also claim such guidance, and it can also be grasped, and tested. However, more on this elsewhere - the point on ontological necessity, like the point on Sunni traditions mentioning the Mahdi are essentially the same, they are once again non-sequitur. 

How so, well I have conceded that in all possible worlds there needs to be a source of infallible guidance. However, this does not maintain the Twelver view, as it is not contradictory, nor does the argument of Shaykh al-Mufid apply here, since in another possible world the Imams could have been 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,etc.

Therefore, the claim of ontological necessity is negated on grounds of it begging the question. Furthermore, the argument collapses via modus tollens, since there is no guidance to begin with, and guidance is placed in the hands of the Shia of the Twelfth Imam who painfully differ between themselves, so much so - as will be highlighted - that they held beliefs of determinism, and anthropomorphism. 

So, seeing that ‘‘This paradigm is employed by al-Mufīd in all his other treatises, and Sharīf al-Murtaḍā adopts and expands on this same methodology in his book “Al-Muqni’ fī al-Ghaybah,” according to the writer. I have addressed how the methodology is explicitly flawed. 

Now, we arrive at the First Epistle: 

Here, al-Shaykh al-Mufid is addressing the question on how it can be claimed that the eleventh Imam, upon him be peace, hid the birth of his son from all of his other relatives. The Shaykh goes on to provide examples of how some individuals hid the birth of their sons, and then this birth was established, and accepted via testimony by two upright Muslims. He also goes on to mention how these examples indicate that hiding a birth (when justified) is justified by virtue of it being contingent on a greater good. Then, the Shaykh concludes by mentioning that a wide range of pious, and trustworthy companions testified to the existence of the twelfth Imam.

In response to the Shaykh, I will begin by mentioning that just because some individuals hid the birth of their sons, this does not mean that the same conditions are viable for the Imam. For example, someone who is tasked with guiding has a greater duty towards guidance, and although person X may be permitted to go on about his life living a pious, and virtuous life, the Imam is not excused to do the same, because the Imam is tasked with actively guiding. 

The reader is invited to reflect on how the Shaykh, may Allah forgive him, chose to cite kings, and historical figures, as opposed to the Quran, or any Prophet. The reason is because, as I mentioned, they are tasked with guidance, and therefore cannot hide, or conceal said guidance, nor said personages who are linked to guidance. Especially from their righteous kindred, who are righteous by consensus. The only way to avoid this quagmire is to say that salvation is not tied to the Twelfth Imam, of course this wouldn’t solve the implications of Imami theology, however, it would exhibit the expected decorum.

In terms of the Shaykh mentioning righteous personages, those who have claimed to have seen the Imam, their case is not like that of the aforementioned case(s) where someone’s lineage would be established by two Muslims, because nobody denied the testimony of those two Muslims. However, in this extraordinary case, you have the kindred of the Imam himself telling these foreigners that what they claim is something which is unfound, and the kindred of the Imam who are negating what these foreigners say are themselves upright, and known for their truthfulness, righteousness, and sacrifice for the religion of Allah. 

Indeed, our respected scholar al-Kazim al-Zaydi makes a wonderful point, he mentions that the Zaydi Imams in particular would be the most joyous, and felicitous if there was a Twelfth Imam, or Twelve designated Imams. This is because they wouldn’t have to face bloodshed, and persecution. Instead, they could sit in the comfort of their homes, and say the matter is in the hands of the Imam. So, it also cannot be said that they rejected this claim out of worldly desire, god forbid, and may one be wary for the sake of their afterlife in charging the greats from among the Ahl al-Bayt with this. 

We thank Allah that the works of the Imams such as the Star of the Ahl al-Bayt al-Imam al-Qasim al-Rassi, or al-Imam al-Nasir al-Utrush are extant. The reader is invited to peruse their writings and see the worldly detachment, and absolute fear of Allah which emanates from their noble works. Therein, one can examine such a matter through a psychological lens. 

The Second Epistle: 

I find that the Shaykh seems to be attacking a strawman here, as the argument is not expressed in its proper form. The point that is being made, unlike the claims of the Imamiya, is that Ja’far al-Naqi is someone who is righteous, and he is closely related to the eleventh Imam. So, why was he not informed, since he explicitly maintains that the father of the twelfth Imam did not have a son. If the Shaykh does not accept Ja’far al-Naqi, he can easily be substituted by a plethora of righteous personages, namely al-Imam Zayd himself who denied the fundamental theological claims of the Imamiya. 

The Third Epistle: 

Yes, if he mentioned that he had a son it would go against the Taqiyya narrative. However, Allah guards, and defends those who carry His message. The message of Allah is never promulgated via occult means, if one, as the Shaykh will mention, seeks to say that there are cases where Prophets, or Imams delegated certain personages this still does not address the contention. The reason is because the Prophet, or Imam being the source of delegation is explicit, it is not something which is dubious. Moreover, never once did Allah link a matter of salvation with occultation. 

The Fourth Epistle: 

The Shaykh mentions that the reason for the forefathers Imam being apparent, and not occult is namely, due to (a) they were engaged in Taqiyya, and (b) they did not place themselves under suspicion. In response to the Shaykh, what he is doing is that he is presupposing the matter, and then providing justification. This does not answer the contention, as the Imam could have engaged in Taqiyya as well, and he could also avoid matters which would place him under questioning. 

Now, one can say that they were after him, as the Shaykh maintains. However, as explicitly demonstrated, and as the Imamiya maintain, only a select few knew of his existence to begin with. So, how can it be said that the Abbasids were hellbent on finding him, and killing him when his own family was perplexed regarding his existence? 

The only answer to this is that the Abbasids were aware of this to begin with, as they are notorious for their ploys, and tactics of deceit which would make one’s skin crawl after taking some time to look into their deeds. Moreover, if one were to consult al-Fihrist for al-Shaykh al-Tusi, they will find that a wide range of those who the Imamis deem reliable worked in very critical positions in relation to the Abbasids - not to mention the Nawbakhat family. 

Furthermore, point (b) is simply incorrect, because al-Kazim, upon him be peace, participated in the rebellion of al-Imam al-Nafs al-Zakiyya, upon him be peace, and even when he pardoned them we find that al-Imam al-Sadiq insisted that he, and his brother Abdullah participate. 

The Fifth Epistle:

In this epistle, the Shaykh makes a grand blunder, it is not his circular reasoning for the reliability of the companions of the eleventh Imam which has been addressed already. Rather, it is his saying regarding the deputies of the Imam ‘‘these same individuals were the intermediaries between him and his Shī’ah. Religious teachings and communications were transmitted from him through these individuals. These individuals also became his representatives in collecting the religious tithes of the Shī’ah’’. I will obstruct this claim by mentioning a severe implication that pertains to the deputies.

During the time of the deputies, the Qomi school was known for its problematic positions, which today are scoffed at, and rightfully so by our Imami brothers. Namely, it is holding to the belief in Tashbih, and Jabr. In the Rasa’il of Shareef al-Murtadha, he notes that all the scholars of Qom with exception to al-Shaykh al-Saduq were upon this creed of Jabr, and Tashbih. Now, if these deputies, those who were supposedly in communication with the Imam, and also knowledgeable as the Shaykh claims, had sent letters to the scholars in Qom so that they may check their Aqeedah for them, what does this say to you? 

Does it support that they were in communication with the Imam? Clearly not, forget guiding the Muslims, or even the Shia, the Imam didn’t guide his own deputies away from anthropomorphism, and determinism! Are these really individuals one is to feel safe in accepting their claims with regards to creed?

Indeed, al-Shaykh al-Tusi has narrated that Abi al-Qasim al-Husayn b. Ruh sent a book to the scholars of Qom, and he wrote to some of its jurists saying: ((Look into this book, and inform me, is there anything in it that you oppose?)). Then, they wrote back to him, saying: It is all correct, and there is nothing within it which opposes us [in creed]. [Ghaybat al-Tusi: 390, also see Tarikh al-Ghayba: v.1, 513]. Furthermore, Muhammad Hadi al-Yusufi said: ((When al-Shalmaghani wrote Kitab al-Ta’dib, al-Shaykh al-Nawbakhti sent it to Qom)) [Mawsu’at al-Tarikh al-Islami: v.8, 583].

Finally, al-Shaykh Asif Muhsini explicitly negates the claim of al-Shaykh al-Mufid, in terms of the deputies being knowledgeable - although, one would at least expect the representatives of the Imams to have their creed in tact, or instead of asking Qomi scholars who clearly needed guidance themselves, to ask the Mahid to guide them. Rather, if it is too much for the Mahdi to guide them, at the very least he could point his deputy to the Baghdadi school instead. Interestingly, the Qomi school can be revived, seeing that the one who would want to take their problematic positions in creed could easily cite the very own deputy of the Imam! 

The Shaykh writes: ((The delegation of the deputies is not due to their superior knowledge in jurisprudence, hadith, and exegesis. Rather, it is due to other reasons. This is why al-Husayn b. Ruh was compelled to send a book to the jurists of Qom. For, he himself was able to differentiate, he would have looked into it himself, as usual)). [Mu’jam al-Ahadith al-Mu’tabara: v.2, 354]. What more does one need to say, and how much more does one need to demonstrate when it comes to the incoherence of such a theology? 

Although Shaykh Asif would also hold oal-Shaykh al-Mufid in question regarding his claim that ‘‘Religious teachings and communications were transmitted from him through these individuals’’. I would also like the reader to note that the excuse al-Shaykh Asif gives is unacceptable as well, when states that: ((The delegation of the deputies is not due to their superior knowledge in jurisprudence, hadith, and exegesis. Rather, it is due to other reasons)).

We have to know those reasons, otherwise, why are we being held to accept the claims of representatives of an infallible Imam who have no superior knowledge in jurisprudence, hadith, and exegesis. Yet, have a superior standing among the Abbasids, and SubhanAllah comfortably collect the Khums while the Abbasids are just sitting there and watching this unfold. For, shouldn’t they be panicking? Aren’t they collecting khums so that the Imam can use it to fight against these tyrants, wasn’t this the mainstream early Imami conception - as Sayyid Kamal notes, the Shia would sleep with their swords under their pillows thinking the Imam is going to rise at any moment. Honestly, it is beyond hysteria at this point, and it is unacceptable that one even takes this seriously. 

The disaster is one can keep on relating contradiction after contradiction, travesty after travesty, the Twelver creed is a creed which fails drastically in light of the Quran, the Sunnah, history, and in light of their own corpus. Keep in mind during the time of Shaykh al-Mufid, the Shia were having problems with an Imam being absent for more than a century. Can you imagine the look on their faces when informed that the Imam is absent for 1189 years, and counting?!

Again, the respected Shaykh strawmans this question as well, because the point isn’t that its not conceivable that the Imam can be absent for over a hundred years, I don’t have an issue - and neither do the ones who raise this contention - that the Imam could be occult for a million years. The problem is the absence of the Imam entails the absence of the implementation of the Shariah of Allah, hence Wilayat al-Faqih after a thousand years of waiting. The creed of occultation is disrespectful to Allah, to His Messengers, to the Prophet, and to the Ahl al-Bayt. It is truly heartbreaking to see the name of the Ahl al-Bayt be pillaged in this manner. 

The Shaykh concludes the fifth epistle by engaging in Qiyas (paradoxically, the Imamis are staunchly against Qiyas, yet seem to use it the most in their theology), he mentions the companions of the cave, al-Khidr, etc, the response to this is that salvation wasn’t tied to them during their absence. 

Epistle Six: 

As mentioned, this is a strawman, as the point isn’t to do with the longevity of the Imams age, it is the longevity of the Shariah not being established. For, Allah informs us to implement the Hudud, to lash the fornicators, administer the Zakat, etc. However, the Imami claim is that only the Imam can establish the Shariah, therefore, the objection to his age is an objection to how long the Quran has been set aside, and leeway is given to tyrants, and secularists to rule the Muslims while everyone is to just sit back and read Dua al-Nudba. 

Epistle Seven:

There were dozens who claimed to represent the Imam, to this day we have the followers of Ahmad b. al-Hasan al-Yamani who support their view from a hadith in al-Kafi which mentions two Mahdis after the Twelver. Again, the Shaykh is begging the question, as he is not providing a means to validate who is representing the Imam, since there were false claimants to his deputyship, such as al-Hallaj, and a dozen others. Finally, this argument is inapplicable to this era, since there is nobody who can claim to represent the Imam, and be taken seriously. 

Therefore, the contention raised by the question that the Shaykh sought to answer in this epistle, which is: There is No Need for a Hidden Imām Because His Existence is Like Non-Existence: No One Is Able to Meet with Him and He Cannot Establish God’s Laws. He Cannot Guide Anyone, Enjoin Good/Forbid Evil, or Call Towards Jihād.
 
Is a contention that is binding, and unanswered. 

As for the second point which the Shaykh mentions in the epistle, that the Imam fears for his life, and therefore matters of the Shariah not being implemented will be the fault of the oppressors is an answer which needs to be read in the context of the Shaykh. It hasn’t been two hundred years since the purported occultation, not over a thousand years where there were dozens upon dozens of just Islamic governments, as well as Twelver dense communities, and to this day we have Iran, which would give the Imam his seat and sacrifice beyond imagination for his sake.

The Eighth Epistle:

The Shaykh says that the Waqifites, and others cannot claim their occult personages, because they were perceived to be dead. However, this does not suffice, because they too can take out of context verses, tag them with Qiyas, and say: {And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was made to resemble him to them} [4:157]. 

The Ninth Epistle:

The Shaykh does not answer the question, and instead appeals to mystery. 

The Tenth Epistle: 

There is no significance in raising this as a contention against the occultation.

With that, I conclude the rebuttal to the ten epistles, and I invite our dear brothers, and sisters to reflect. 

~ Muhammad al-Sharifi

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
1 hour ago, Hameedeh said:

Members who are not Twelvers (including Sunnis, Zaidis, Hindus, Atheists, etc.) are not allowed to proselytize their religion: 

https://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/12120-shiachatcom-rules-and-policy/?do=findComment&comment=3355710

Thanks for your interpretation.

The content belongs to OP a Zaidi and they are not allowed to propagate their view, The matter of OP may be ceased or may be shifted to Minor Islamic Sect forum as per Sc rules, This is my suggestion and request keeping in view the scenario for OP.

Wasallam.

Edited by Muslim2010
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Veteran Member
28 minutes ago, Cool said:

Well I am not interested in what you have selected for yourself. For us, there is no such thing as "consensus of Ahlul Bayt". For us, only an Imam can nominate his successor, there is no nass of consensus like thing with us. 

Absolutely correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

If I may:

The only 'sect' that makes it to paradise safely inshallah, are the ones who don't split themselves into groups , and they believe that the Ummah is one Ummah, and we are all brothers and sisters in God, as long as we live by and witness through actions and tongue that there is no god except One God, and that His messenger is Mohamed. Now the rest is all interpretation, and we have no right to make our own clubs or groups, where we claim to be the guided sect/group of those who call themselves Muslims.

Thanks 

Wasalaam

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Muslim2010 said:

Thanks for your interpretation.

The content belongs to OP a Zaidi and they are not allowed to propagate their view, The matter of OP may be ceased or may be shifted to Minor Islamic Sect forum as per Sc rules, This is my suggestion and request keeping in view the scenario for OP.

Wasallam.

Isn't this Shia/Sunni dialogue? Instead of discussing you want to silence me, I don't think that's a message you want to convey. Also, if anything, our Twelver brothers, and sisters know what it's like to be unjustifiably silenced, so I hope that they don't do the same here - and I admire, and respect that they haven't done so. Also, you mentioned propagating my view, how is this propagating my view when nothing I mentioned necessarily argues for Zaydism, it is just a critique of Twelver arguments regarding the occultation. So, even what you are seeking to charge me with in this thread isn't really present, regardless. Also, I would say that your recommendation to shift it to the Minor Islamic Sect section is incorrect, as we are exclusively discussing Twelver theology - reference to Zaydism is contingent on the fact that we are addressing this focal point which is the occultation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Isn't this Shia/Sunni dialogue? Instead of discussing you want to silence me, I don't think that's a message you want to convey. Also, if anything, our Twelver brothers, and sisters know what it's like to be unjustifiably silenced, so I hope that they don't do the same here - and I admire, and respect that they haven't done so. Also, you mentioned propagating my view, how is this propagating my view when nothing I mentioned necessarily argues for Zaydism, it is just a critique of Twelver arguments regarding the occultation. So, even what you are seeking to charge me with in this thread isn't really present, regardless. Also, I would say that your recommendation to shift it to the Minor Islamic Sect section is incorrect, as we are exclusively discussing Twelver theology - reference to Zaydism is contingent on the fact that we are addressing this focal point which is the occultation. 

Brother just pray that you and I recognize the current, or upcoming, Imam. Your books or our books or their books alone won't help us. Only the true vision and being chosen to be in tune with the truth, when there is no visible Imam. I believe that is being 'good' people (as my mother told me) is what it's all about. In context to your close ones among your family and neighbors and friends. So let us not get heated and make people feel like we are on a crusade or mission, which I am guilty of the most in this website. 

Just used to take myself so damn seriously .. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Exactly, the same hadith negates your claim, as he literally says to the Imam in a room which there is no one save the Khawas, and the Imam:

Have you seen the hadith?

Where are khawas mentioned along with Imam there? Do you think the 

لا إلى المرجئة ولا إلى القدرية ولا إلى الزيدية ولا إلى المعتزلة ولا إلى الخوارج

names in bold above are the khawas? 

32 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

How much more explicit can it get? And SubhanAllah, this is the same person who was trying to teach Imam Zayd who the Imam is! Now, he is lost, not knowing who the Imam is after al-Sadiq,

lol, please go through the hadith again and please translate it for me, you looks good in Arabic.

And here are more ahadith:

بسند صحيح: ((عن سليمان بن خالد، قال: دعا أبو عبد الله(عليه السلام) أبا الحسن - (كنية الإمام الكاظم(عليه السلام) )- يوماً ونحن عنده، فقال لنا: (عليكم بهذا، فهو والله صاحبكم بعدي) ))

Then,

بسند موثّق: ((عن فيض بن المختار، في حديث طويل في أمر أبي الحسن(عليه السلام)، حتّى قال له أبو عبد الله(عليه السلام): (هو صاحبك الذي سألت عنه، فقم إليه فأقرّ له بحقّه...) الحديث))

Then,

بسند حسن: ((عن صفوان الجمال، عن أبي عبد الله(عليه السلام)، قال: قال له منصور بن حازم: بأبي أنت وأُمّي، إنّ الأنفس يُغدى عليها ويراح، فإذا كان ذلك فمن؟ فقال أبو عبد الله(عليه السلام): (إذا كان ذلك فهو صاحبكم)، وضرب بيده على منكب أبي الحسن(عليه السلام) الأيمن - في ما أعلم - وهو يومئذ خماسي، وعبد الله بن جعفر جالس معنا))

The word “your companion” gives the meaning of “your imam” to his listeners, in the context of the questioner and the respondent. 

39 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Everyone was lost! Where is this hadith of the tablet? Why were al-Taq, Zurara, Hisham, and Abu Basir needing to enter into this closed room - i.e taqiyya is off bounds - and then they had to inquire (in this taqiyya free room with Khawas only) in order to finally believe in him. 

Again wrong, the hadith of Abu Hamza is there too, how he figured out the Imam out of five, everyone did the same as mentioned in the hadith you are referring to as well:

ثم قلت له: جعلت فداك أسألك عما كنت أسأل أباك؟ فقال: سل تخبر ولا تذع، فإن أذعت فهو الذبح، فسألته فإذا هو بحر لا ينزف، قلت: جعلت فداك شيعتك وشيعة أبيك ضلال فألقى إليهم وأدعوهم إليك؟ وقد أخذت علي الكتمان؟ قال: من آنست منه رشدا فالق إليه وخذ عليه الكتمان فإن أذاعوا فهو الذبح - وأشار بيده إلى حلقه 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
41 minutes ago, Zaidism said:
53 minutes ago, Cool said:

 

Exactly, the same hadith negates your claim, as he literally says to the Imam in a room which there is no one save the Khawas, and the Imam:

"He had specific wills, which made it public for the people, in which he appointed five persons as his successors: al-Mansour al-Dawaneeqi, Muhammad ibn Sulayman, Abdullah, his son Imam Mousa, his wife Hamida. He made this plan fearing the assassination of his son, Imam al-Khadhim (عليه السلام), by the cruel authority.

The reason behind this became clear after his departure, as al-Mansour wrote a letter to his agent in Yathrib, ordering him to kill the successor of the Imam (عليه السلام). The agent told him that the Imam (عليه السلام) had appointed five and that he was one of them. Then al-Mansour replied: “It is not necessary to do so.”

He, in all his wills, specified his son, Imam al-Kadhim (عليه السلام) as his successor and ordered him to perform and prepare all the funeral steps and to pray the death prayer on him. Additionally, he appointed him as the next Imam and let his close companions know about the necessity of obeying him."

-The life of Imam Sadiq by Baqir sharif al qurashi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, Cool said:

Have you seen the hadith?

Where are khawas mentioned along with Imam there? Do you think the 

لا إلى المرجئة ولا إلى القدرية ولا إلى الزيدية ولا إلى المعتزلة ولا إلى الخوارج

names in bold above are the khawas? 

Don’t take my word for it, ask any reputable scholar are the ones who said these words Hisham b. Salim, and al-Taq. I assure you, they are :).

6 minutes ago, Cool said:

lol, please go through the hadith again and please translate it for me, you looks good in Arabic.

With all due respect, this isn’t a serious discussion anymore. The narration I quoted is Mu’tabar. You’re going back to this blind taqlid of rijaal, I am highlighting the inconsistency for you. Otherwise, there are dozens of authentic narration that say the Prophet designated twelve Imams, and then it goes on listing their names - your corpus is highly problematic, and once again no response to anything regarding the occultation. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
25 minutes ago, Allah Seeker said:

If I may:

The only 'sect' that makes it to paradise safely inshallah, are the ones who don't split themselves into groups , and they believe that the Ummah is one Ummah, and we are all brothers and sisters in God, as long as we live by and witness through actions and tongue that there is no god except One God, and that His messenger is Mohamed. Now the rest is all interpretation, and we have no right to make our own clubs or groups, where we claim to be the guided sect/group of those who call themselves Muslims.

Thanks 

Wasalaam

 

I value the essence of approach, sectarianism is nothing anyone should advocate for. However, the point is, if we want to be able to know who holds X view, and Y view we have to be able to somewhat classify them. Again, in the spirit of your remarks, I am trying to advance the discussion, and show why I think Twelver theology is incoherent, and Zaydism is a more consistent reading. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
51 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

My brother, if there were a million sub-narrators, it still wouldn't change the fact that it is solitary. 

Even if you consider any report solitary, there is nothing wrong with it as long as the chain of narrator is sahih. The Ahlul Sunnah don't reject these ahadith by saying them solitary reports. 

This report was narrated by Masrooq & also directly by Abdullah ibn Masood. Following is the report of Jabir:

روى أحمد في مسنده (ج5 /99) عن جابر بن سمرة قال: ((خطبنا رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) بعرفات، وقال المقدمي في حديثه سمعت رسول الله (صلى الله عليه وآله) يخطب بمنى، فسمعته يقول: (لن يزال هذا الامر عزيزاً ظاهراً حتى يملك اثنا عشر كلهم)، ثم لغط القوم وتكلموا فلم أفهم قوله بعد كلهم! فقلت لأبي: يا أبتاه ما بعد كلهم؟ قال: (كلهم من قريش) )).

So your allegation of solitary proved wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, Cool said:

Even if you consider any report solitary, there is nothing wrong with it as long as the chain of narrator is sahih. The Ahlul Sunnah don't reject these ahadith by saying them solitary reports. 

I am not a Sunni, the report is not present in our works. The chain is exclusively Nasabi. 

3 minutes ago, Cool said:

This report was narrated by Masrooq & also directly by Abdullah ibn Masood. Following is the report of Jabir:

The report converges and narrates from Jabir.

3 minutes ago, Cool said:

So your allegation of solitary proved wrong.

With all due respect, you are objectively incorrect, and you are demonstrating that you aren't grasping the argument nor understand the contention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
12 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

ask any reputable scholar are the ones who said these words Hisham b. Salim, and al-Taq. I assure you, they are :).

I am not questioning these words, rather I have questioned what you said i e., The two (Mo'min al-Taq & Hisham) were with Imam in a room and there were khawas too in that room.

24 minutes ago, Cool said:

he literally says to the Imam in a room which there is no one save the Khawas, and the Imam:

These were your words and you found guilty of twisting the hadith, that's indeed sad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cool said:

I am not questioning these words, rather I have questioned what you said i e., The two (Mo'min al-Taq & Hisham) were with Imam in a room and there were khawas too in that room.

Yes, they are Khawas. Khawas, and al-Taq/Hisam is used interchangeably. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Zaidism said:

am not a Sunni, the report is not present in our works. The chain is exclusively Nasabi. 

lol, And you are neither Shia, so why you are quoting our hadith? Why even discussing the 12th Imam & his occultation if you don't want to take into consideration the ahadith mentioning him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cool said:

lol, And you are neither Shia, so why you are quoting our hadith? Why even discussing the 12th Imam & his occultation if you don't want to take into consideration the ahadith mentioning him.

Because they are proof against you? Why do you quote from Bukhari, Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayyba, etc when debating Sunnis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

he is a shia though, just a zaidi shia. 

Thank you for your fairness brother, may Allah bless you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
15 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Because they are proof against you?

And proof against you are the ahadith in Sunni & Shi'i books mentioning 12 Imams. 

Proof against you are your own books mentioning Imams will be either martyred by sword or by poison. 

Proof against you are your own books which mentions your Imam fighting with your another Imam.

So when your solitary report objection proved wrong, you have started claiming that you are not Sunni. Why then you were claiming the reports were solitary? 

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
19 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

he is a shia though, just a zaidi shia. 

Those who categorically deny the existence as well as prophecy of Imam Mehdi ajtf cannot be Shia nor they are considered Sunni. Who the Zaydiyyah are, I can't say anything.

They have invented principles for themselves. Like consensus of Ahlul Bayt, rise with sword and call to himself etc, the speciality of their creed is that the ones whom they call their Imams, were not their Imams of knowledge lol. 

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cool said:
18 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

 

Those who categorically deny the existence as well as prophecy of Imam Mehdi ajtf cannot be Shia nor they are considered Sunni. Who the Zaydiyyah are, I can't say anything.

to be fair being called shia has not been dependent on believing Imam Mahdi, but in rejecting the first three caliphs, and asserting that Imam Ali was the rightful successor. That is why we have ismailis and zaidis and they are considered shia in the general sense, despite the fact that we differ strongly with them. We would be the twelver shia and we are the majority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

salam brother would you kindly answer the response i gave a few posts back giving the account that explains why Imam Sadiq chose 5 people

Wa Alaykum al-Salam, absolutely brother. This is the Twelver narrative, but as I demonstrated, the claim of the respective Shaykh here:

57 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

he appointed him as the next Imam and let his close companions know about the necessity of obeying him."

Is incorrect.
 

The reason is because the narration I shared, and highlighted, indicates clearly that these companions weren't informed by Imam al-Sadiq as to who the Imam is, the Imami creed was a creed that kept on developing through history. After each Imam they would splinter into dozens of factions, for instance up until the 11th Imam you have 14 new Imami sects emerge after his death! And this is a constant theme, hence you even find in twelver works our twelver brothers quoting from Nusyaris, fathis, Zaydis, waqifis, etc because some were upon the creed, and then 'deviated' after the death of an Imam. For instance, al-Majlisi himself mentions how some of the Waqifis were themselves jurists from the Imami creed, they weren't random people. 

Also brother, keep in mind I am going above and beyond by providing this criticism, I can simply say to Twelvers, and Ismailis that on what basis do you hold us to believing in 12 Imams when we don't have such narrations in our works, the imams themselves hid the fact that they were imams from the Muslims, and from their families (the sons of the Imams were Zaydis) and hadith thaqalayn does not restrict the Imama to the sons of al-Imam al-Husayn exclusively.

Furthermore, my contentions on the occultation - that are still untouched - and my point from the Quran, history, and the differences between the Imamiyah prove beyond doubt that the problems present with the theology strike it’s core at a fundamental level. 

Here is our Imam from the sons of Imam Hasan addressing another problem with Imamism (contemporary to our Zaydi Imam Ali al-Rida), I highly recommend taking a look at this thread:

 

Edited by Zaidism
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, Cool said:

Proof against you are your own books mentioning Imams will be either martyred by sword or by poison. 

Source? 
 

17 minutes ago, Cool said:

Proof against you are your own books which mentions your Imam fighting with your another Imam.

There is no such thing is an Imam fighting an Imam, that is an oxymoron. Also, let’s say Zaydism is false, still doesn’t solve the problems I have posed. 
 

19 minutes ago, Cool said:

So when your solitary report objection proved wrong, you have started claiming that you are not Sunni. Why then you were claiming the reports were solitary? 

You are the one bringing up a solitary Sunni report with a Nasibi chain narrated by an Umayyad with wording that is contradictory to your own view

11 minutes ago, Cool said:

Those who categorically deny the existence as well as prophecy of Imam Mehdi ajtf cannot be Shia nor they are considered Sunni. Who the Zaydiyyah are, I can't say anything.

They have invented principles for themselves. Like consensus of Ahlul Bayt, rise with sword and call to himself etc, the speciality of their creed is that the ones whom they call their Imams, were not their Imams of knowledge lol. 

And my refutation to shaykh al-Mufid remains untouched! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

being called shia has not been dependent on believing Imam Mahdi, but in rejecting the first three caliphs

Since when they have "rejected" the first three caliphs? 

فالمشهور أن الصالحية والسليمانية يرون جواز إمامة المفضول، وصحة ولاية أبي بكر، نقل هذا عنهم كثيرٌ ممن كتب في الملل والنحل من الزيدية وغيرهم

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 minutes ago, Cool said:

Those who categorically deny the existence as well as prophecy of Imam Mehdi ajtf cannot be Shia nor they are considered Sunni. Who the Zaydiyyah are, I can't say anything.

As brother @Allah Seeker said let's not focus on labels, and lets focus on substance.

25 minutes ago, Cool said:

Imam fighting with your another Imam

Our scholarship have refuted your slanderous lies which you have taken from disingenuous sources

Question:

Do the Zaydīs have the understanding that: Our Imām (upon him be peace) killed our Imām (upon him be peace)? In the same way that it may be said regarding the Sunnīs, that: The companion (may Allāh be pleased with him) killed the companion (may Allāh be pleased with him).
This is a reading for some after seeing the differences between those who have called to the Imāmah, due to what has occurred of tribulation, and fighting. 

Answer: 

This is a narrow, haste, and childish conclusion in respect to intellectual research. We will answer the matter academically, and then desist from addressing it furthermore. 
He will be responsible for himself - the person who poses such a [childish] contention - and His judgment is upon Allāh, the Exalted. To make the matter clear in a concise fashion we will advance with a few preliminary points. 

The First Point: The Zaydīs don’t believe in the infallibility of particular members from the progeny of the Prophet - i.e one one of the Fāṭimids - rather, the Zaydīs say: There are of them who can be unjust to themselves, take the middle ground, or be foremost in good deeds. Therefore, the one who commits a major sin, insisting upon it without repentance will be deserving of chastisement as per the decisive of the Noble Qurʾān. This is a clear difference between those who - necessitate, and maintain - that all the companions are forgiven, and that Allāh praised them collectively without consideration of their deeds, and actions. Therefore, the Qiyās (analogy) here is invalid. 

The Second Point: Zaydīs don’t say “our Imām killed our Imām” this is a childish conclusion, because Zaydīs don’t consider both of them to be Imāms. Rather, only one of them is an Imām, as for the other one who opposes him, if his aggression, and intent is established then the Zaydīs will place him in the place which he placed himself. They will not be pleased with him, and will deem chastisement necessary for him. At times the matter may be convoluted for us as we have arrived much later than them, and the sources of transmission are not clear regarding their situation, so as to reach a definitive conclusion regarding who the aggressor was, and if the matter was purposeful. If what has reached us is positive, yet the doubt is present; we as those who have come later not possessing the correct context to judge, carry both of them with equally good regard while holding the conviction that in the knowledge of Allāh the Imām is only one of them, and Allāh will judge between them. Therefore, this is the context of our saying to both of them: “upon them be peace,” or “may Allāh be pleased with them”. It is not to say that both of them are correct in that dispute, rather the errancy of one of them is maintained. 

If it is said: What is the difference between that, and between what those who attribute themselves to the Sunnīs say?

We say: The difference is explicitly clear, for definitive evidence has been provided regarding the rebelliousness, or sin of some companions. Then, after all that they say that Allāh is pleased with them, and consider them to be of those who will be forgiven, and accepted just because they are companions. They deem certain verses from the Qurʾān to be referring to them generally, and this is not the position of the Zaydīyya. The difference is that in this era, we don’t possess the evidence to be certain  regarding the rebelliousness, or sin of one of the opponents. Therefore, what is upon us is to choose positive regard, due to what has reached us of positivity regarding the both of them. For, to deem someone a Fāsiq without decisive (Qatʿī) proof is prohibited. Now, you are aware of the difference. 

The Third Point: The contention of the Imāmīyah is an inconsistency, they are refuted by what they themselves are contending with, without a doubt, and with what is far more clearer, and compelling. For, they narrate in their own books the cursing of al-Imām al-Ṣādiq, and others from their Imāms (upon them be peace) towards the heads, and greats of their sect! Cursing the likes of: Zurāra b. Aʿyun, Muʾmin al-Ṭāq, Hishām b. al-Ḥakam, Hishām b. Sālim, and others to their likes. 
Then, they go on to send praises upon them! They make them as a means between them , and Allāh, the Exalted, in knowing their creed, jurisprudence, and foundation of their sect. 

This means that they are saying: May Allāh be pleased with the great of our Salaf Zurāra who our infallible Imām Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad cursed. And from another perspective: Our Salaf al-Ḥāfiḍ al-Shaykh al-Ṣadūq “may Allāh have mercy on him” who was refuted by our Salaf al-Ḥāfiḍ al-Shaykh al-Mufīd "may Allāh have mercy on him”. Moreover, both of them are the narrators of Ḥadīth, and the jurists who the occult Mahdī advised to hold onto. Then, each [Imāmī] jurist is cursing, and refuting the other [in matters of Uṣūl]. For, it is well known that al-Shaykh al-Ṣadūq cursed a group from the greats of the Imāmī Salaf when it comes to the issue of procrastination, and attributing Tafwīḍ, and Ghulū (extreme exaggeration) to them. Likewise, our “righteous Salaf” from Qom, and their refuting of al-Shaykh al-Mufīd, and his refutation of them.

 As for all of them: “may Allāh sanctify their secrets, and souls”. We are advised to follow all of them in religion by the occult one. In conclusion,  there is no infallible Imām present. The narrators of Ḥadīth, jurists, and Marājʿ differ in Uṣūl (fundamentals of the religion), and in Furūʿ (principles of the religion) which we have made clear beyond a doubt in our varying answers, wherein the questioner may find in seeking them. Moreover, he who goes over the Imāmī corpus will find that they have accepted what has come from two factions which have shedded each other’s blood! Either by what happened to al-Mīrzā al-Istrābādī of slander, rather of bloodshed! Killing him, and a group from the Akhbārīyya. Then, they see that both the one who has had his blood shed, and the one who has shed his blood - according to them - as being sources of guidance, and emulation to the Shīʿa of the occult one!

Each of them seeing that they are the ones who the occult Mahdī informed the people to hold to. They each differ in their epistemology, this is not merely a difference in history, and justice. They each see that they are upon the “creed of the Ahl al-Bayt”. Moreover, consider what is occurring today between the jurists, and Marājiʿ of the Imāmīya, and their slandering one another, be it openly, or secretly. Rather, perceive the accusations they hurl against each other of one scholar being the reason for the death of another, or their silence, persecution, and removal from the position of Marjaʿīyya. To deny all this is pure sophism. To the extent that you see a group from the Imāmīyah seeking to collectively support those from among them who are upon falsehood, and upon “truth”. Or, you see them disassociating themselves from one another, and deeming each other to have deviated from faith. You find a group that is silent, sufficing with sending mercy upon everyone, due to reason of choosing peace, or not having the means to judge definitively, and to the likes of those excuses which they will give.

Therefore, can they not say to themselves that they have fell into what they have criticized other than them? Rather, you are more clearly upon what you have [wrongfully] criticized other than you! Moreover, the problem is that your differences are credal differences, and this is not the case with those who have opposed each other from our school. For, they [the Zaydīs] are all on agreement when it comes to their epistemology, and framework. Can the same be said for you, when after your disputes, and decrees you still cannot reach a consensus whether the Qurʾān is corrupted or not, whether it is missing verses, or whether it is complete! And that is a fundamental matter of legislation, and what follows from that conclusion is further ignorance, and varying deductions. Your “Ahl al-Bayt” has been absent for twelve centuries. 

May Allāh grant you success. 

O Allāh bless Muḥammad, and the Ahl al-Bayt of Muḥammad.

Written by: al-Kāẓim al-Zaydī

Translated by: Muḥammad al-Sharīfī

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 minutes ago, Cool said:

Since when they have "rejected" the first three caliphs? 

فالمشهور أن الصالحية والسليمانية يرون جواز إمامة المفضول، وصحة ولاية أبي بكر، نقل هذا عنهم كثيرٌ ممن كتب في الملل والنحل من الزيدية وغيرهم

Why are you quoting Sunni works, that isn't fair. Why not quite Zaydi works that explicate the Zaydi position?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Why are you quoting Sunni works, that isn't fair. Why not quite Zaydi works that explicate the Zaydi position?

Our position regarding the first three is quite simple, Imam Ali, Hasan, and Husyan did not curse them. Thus we don't curse them. They are wrong for advancing Imam Ali, but we don't do takfir on them because Imam Ali did not deem them to be Kuffar, if they were Kuffar then he would have been obligated to wage war against them, like he did with the tyrant Muawiyah. We place their affairs in the hands of Allah, and we focus on following the Ahl al-Bayt, and not worry about cursing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
33 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Why are you quoting Sunni works, that isn't fair. Why not quite Zaydi works that explicate the Zaydi position?

As you wish, here they are:

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

Yet another:

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 

49 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

Source? 

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 )

Furthermore, you can have more than one Imam at a time lol,

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

(المصدر السابق)

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

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
53 minutes ago, Cool said:

As you wish, here they are:

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

Yet another:

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 

This actually highlights my point all the more, if you want to insist on the number 12 we have the 12 سبط from the sons of al-Hasan 6, and the sons of al-Husayn 6 

55 minutes ago, Cool said:

Furthermore, you can have more than one Imam at a time lol,

Yes, because the point of Imama is to establish the Sharia, you can have more than one Islamic government, hence more than one Imam.

56 minutes ago, Cool said:

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

How? There is no infallible after al-Husayn, or anyone designated. This is a profound statement, we hold everyone under the criteria of the Quran, and Sunnah. Just because they are Imams doesn't mean they get a pass.

57 minutes ago, Cool said:

A clear contradiction to the following:

أولهم علي بن الحسين

Imam Sajjad is not a designated Imam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Zaidism said:

How? There is no infallible after al-Husayn, or anyone designated. This is a profound statement, we hold everyone under the criteria of the Quran, and Sunnah. Just because they are Imams doesn't mean they get a pass.

Salam,

Do you believe that the Prophets, from Adam, and the Imams, up to al-Husayn, (Peace be upon them all) have been divinely designated?

If so, why has the designation process changed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Zaidism said:

This actually highlights my point all the more, if you want to insist on the number 12 we have the 12 سبط from the sons of al-Hasan 6, and the sons of al-Husayn 6 

Brother, if you are really unable to cite what the matn says, then allow me to show you what it says.

At first the text says:

واعلم ان الله عزوجل جعل خلف النبوة من ابناء نبيه في اثنى عشر سبطاً

So Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) made the successor of the Prophethood among the sons of His Prophet, and you have excluded al-Hassan & al-Hussain عليهم السلام from the list of 12.

What a joke!! 

What else, the matn also mentions the 12 Imams as:

5 hours ago, Zaidism said:

وهم بمنزلة اسباط بني اسرائيل حجة الله على خلقه وأمان أهل الأرض من استيصال عذابه

 

Note the terms "hujjat Allahe ala khalqeg", "amaana ahl al-ard". This essentially pointing towards the "ismah" of each & every Imam in the list of 12. 

This unfortunately, is not in line with the belief of your creed. 

Then we further see Zaidiyyah exclude from that list Imam al-Sajjad & Imam al-Baqir عليهم السلام. 

5 hours ago, Zaidism said:

There is no infallible after al-Husayn, or anyone designated.

The alleged "profound statement" saying "We do not have an imam who is supposed to be obeyed after Hussain (عليه السلام)". So there were no amaan ahl al-ard & hujjatullahe ala khalqeh after Hussain (عليه السلام)? There were no "Ulil Amr" and the "amr of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) cease to descend during that period (na'udobillah). 

What else? during that period, all the believers who died, died the death of ignorance as per hadith:

من مات و لم يعرف الامام مات ميتة جاهلية

This hadith I remember is also present in masnad Zayd al-Shaheed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Guest 12345 said:

If so, why has the designation process changed?

Wa Alaykum al-Salam

The source of designation is Allah, and the Prophet. When the Prophet departed there wouldn't be any more designating since he is the seal of the Prophets, and further revelation was complete.

Allah placed the prophethood and scripture in the descendants of Noah and Ibrahim, and as long as Ibrahim is himself a descendant of Noah, so he and his descendants are the continuing chain of the chosen descendants of Noah:

Allah says:

‎“وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي ذُرِّيَّتِهِمَا النُّبُوَّةَ وَالْكِتَابَ ۖ فَمِنْهُم مُّهْتَدٍ ۖ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ”

“And We have already sent Noah and Abraham and placed in their descendants prophethood and scripture; and among them is he who is guided, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.”(57:26)

Allah mentions that He chose the progeny of Ibrahim and placed in them prophethood and scripture

"And We gave to Him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob and [placed in his descendants prophethood and scripture]. And We gave him his reward in this world, and indeed, he is in the Hereafter among the righteous. (29:27)

Which means that the descendants [the progeny/family] of Ibrahim are the chosen ones in whom He the Almighty placed the:

- Prophethood
- The Book.

These descendants [of Ibrahim] are either prophets or holders of the scripture:

Allah mentions that there are prophets from Ibrahim descendants, and these kinds of chosen people are infallible because they are prophets:

Allah says:

‎“وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُ إِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ ۚ كُلًّا هَدَيْنَا ۚ وَنُوحًا هَدَيْنَا مِن قَبْلُ ۖ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِهِ دَاوُودَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُوسُفَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَهَارُونَ ۚ وَكَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمحسنين”

“And We gave to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob - all [of them] We guided. And Noah, 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.” (6:84)

As for scripture this points to two types of chosen people, either the prophets that were sent with Holy books, or descendants that are not prophets but they are chosen as in verses (29:27) and (37:113)

“And We blessed him and Isaac, But among their descendants is the doer of good and the clearly unjust to himself ” (37:113).

“And We have already sent Noah and Abraham and placed in their descendants prophethood and scripture; and among them is he who is guided, but many of them are defiantly disobedient.” (57:26)

Allah has pointed out that these chosen descendants can be either doers of good, or unjust to themselves as mentioned in verses (57:26) and (37:113), and there are chosen people for the scripture as in this verse:

‎“ثُمَّ أَوْرَثْنَا الْكِتَابَ الَّذِينَ اصْطَفَيْنَا مِنْ عِبَادِنَا ۖ

Then we caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants; and among them is he who wrongs himself, and among them is he who is moderate, and among them is he who is foremost in good deeds by permission of Allah. That [inheritance] is what is the great bounty.” (35:32)

Which means that the descendants of Ibrahim are infallible as individuals (as Allah has mentioned of the prophets by their names, and fallible as whole/group (as Allah has mentioned no individuals by their names but as group like in verses (35:32), (37:113) and (57:26).

As Allah says in (33:62):

“A consistent practice of Allah in the matter of those who have gone before. And you will never find a change in Allah’s consistent practice.”

These following verses will explain more about this pattern

Allah the Exalted said:

"Indeed, Allah chose Adam and Noah and the family of Abraham and the family of 'Imran over the worlds” – “ [ Descendants, some of them from others]. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.” (3:33-34)

These verses (3:33-34) say that the descendants are related, but these related descendants will continue to spread:

Allah says:

“And he made it a word [Remaining among his descendants] that they might return [to it].”(43:28)

Ibrahim was made as an Imam for the people, and this Imamate will continue through his descendants:

“And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham was tried by his Lord with commands and he fulfilled them. [Allah] said, "Indeed, I will make you a leader for the people." [Abraham] said, "And of my descendants?" [Allah] said, "My covenant does not include the wrongdoers.”(1:124)

continuation of the (prophethood and scripture/Imamate (in general)

Allah says:

"Our Lord, I have settled some of my descendants in an uncultivated valley near [Your sacred House], our Lord, that they may establish prayer. So make hearts among the people incline toward them and provide for them from the fruits that they might be grateful.(14:37)

So, Descendants of Ibrahim in Mecca.

The chosen ones from these descendants in Mecca were either Prophets, or holders of the scriptures, then the prophethood was eventually made for Mohammad as the last prophet and Messenger –(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)- from the descendants of Ibrahim, then the continuation of the scripture will continue in the descendants of Ibrahim through the descendants of Mohammed –pbuth all-

The descendants of the Prophet are as this following verse mentions:

"Then whoever argues with you about it after [this] knowledge has come to you - say: Come, let us call [our sons] and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then supplicate earnestly [together] and invoke the curse of Allah upon the liars [among us]."(3:61)

The sons of Mohammed in the verse are only Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein.

Allah mentions that the purified the progeny of Prophet:

“Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet's] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification”.(33:33)

(33:33) refers to the Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet known as ( Ahlul Kissa’)

The verse (3:61) mentions that the sons of the Prophet, or ‘itra are Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein

The Quran maintains that the scripture will be continuing in the descendants of Ibrahim until the Prophet –(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)- said that that the Quran and His descendants (Hadith Thaqalayn) will be available to his nation

This continuation is through the descendants, and the only descendants of the Prophet –(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)- are Fatimah and her sons (Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein) mentioned as Ahlulbayt in the verse (33:33) and mentioned as the prophet’ sons in verse (3:61), then the continuation will follow from the sons of Imam Hassan, and Imam Hussein.

Therefore, designation can either be through

1- infallible individuals: who are mentioned by their names as prophets or Imams like (Ali, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein), because of being mentioned by their names in narrations explaining the verses (3:61) and (33:33),

2- fallible groups like:

bani Israi’l which Allah preferred them and chose among them Imams that are not named but known by their deeds as in verse (33:24)

Descendants of Ibrahim and Mohammed –pbuth- as in the verse:

“Then we caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants; and among them is he who wrongs himself, and among them is he who is moderate, and among them is he who is foremost in good deeds by permission of Allah. That [inheritance] is what is the great bounty.” (35:32)

When Zaydis say that the narration of Thaqalayn refers to the Quranic standard of the continuation of the descendants of Ibrahim and Muhammad (pbut)

Applying this as

1- particular designation: Ali, Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein –(صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)- as infallible according to the proofs from Quran and Narration as mentioned above.

2- General designation: the descendants of the Prophet from his mentioned sons (Al-Hassan and Al-Hussein) who are the inheritors of scripture and are not infallible, because (35:32) pointed out that these chosen ones are three type:

- wrongdoers
- moderates,
- foremost in good deeds,

and these three types are describing the deeds (wrongdoing, moderating, being foremost in good deeds) and not mentioning the names, which is like the Imams from bany Isra’il who are not mentioned by their names but through gaining the descriptions as in the verse (33:24), and as Allah describes that He made the prophethood and scripture in the descendants of Ibrahim but some of them are guided and some are wrongdoers

~ Ibn Yahya

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Although I think the sect of the Ahl al-Bayt, upon them be peace, is a more coherent reading to follow than the sect of al-Shaykh al-Mufid, al-Saduq, al-Murtada, and al-Tusi, may Allah have mercy on them, and forgive them, my main intention is not this. 

Salam nobody between twelvers have clalied that we follow "the sect of al-Shaykh al-Mufid, al-Saduq, al-Murtada, and al-Tusi, may Allah have mercy on them" but on the other hand all twelvers even their enemies have said that Twelvers have followed sect of Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) which Imam Jafar sadiq (عليه السلام) has great rule in organizing & spreading Twelverism which it also has been called as Jafarism which sometime people likewise Wahabist & other anti shia people have mistaken that Jafarism & Twelverism are two different sects which until now nobody has claimed that follows sect of l-Shaykh al-Mufid, al-Saduq, al-Murtada, and al-Tusi, may Allah have mercy on them .

14 hours ago, Zaidism said:

Think for yourself, what exactly do I have to gain from this? I have chosen to follow the creed of the most oppressed people, and nation during our contemporary time. Yemen itself is in need of support, and they don’t have access to life’s basic necessities, so can one say to me that I am seeking the adornments of this world by defending and raising the honorable banner of the Ahl al-Bayt in a time where their supporters are weakened, silenced, starved, and butchered?

Most oppressed people in Yemen are Jarudiyah Zaidis which their enemies from Saudi monarchs & wahabists & Salfist call them Houthies because their belief is  so close to Twelverism which their enemies can't recognize them from Twelvers which their martyred leader Hussein Badreddin al-Houth has converted from  Jarudiyah Zaidiah to Twelverism which a great number of his followers have been conerted to Twelverism which due that KSA has started it's attack to Yemen for stopping spreading Twelverism beteen Zaidis of Yemen which in opposittion to your claim about denial of  Imam Mahdi (aj) , they beleive to concept of Mahdawiyya although they have diferent viewpoint from Twelvers which who is Mahdi which according to them Mahdi has born but he has died so then he will return in Raj'a

Quote

Jarudiyya

Priority: c, Quality: c
 
 

Jārūdīyya (Arabic: جارودیة) is the first Zaydi sect. It is attributed to its most prominent leader, Abu l-Jarud Ziyad b. Mundhar.

Jarudiyya believed that the Prophet Muhammad (s) appointed 'Ali (a) as an Imam by pointing to his characteristics without mentioning his name. They did believe, however, that those characteristics were exclusive to 'Ali (a), and thus, they believed that the denial of 'Ali's (a) imamate after the demise of the Prophet (s) would lead to infidelity and deviation from the right path.

Jarudiyya also believed that there were similar remarks (by the Prophet (s)) concerning the imamate of Imam al-Hasan (a) and Imam al-Husayn (a). They maintained that after these three Imams, there is no explicit text regarding the imamate of any 'Alawi. However, they restrict the imamate to children of Imam al-Hasan (a) and Imam al-Husayn (a). Like other Zaydis, Jarudiyya held that every 'Alawi whose lineage reliably goes back to Imam al-Hasan (a) and Imam al-Husayn (a) and is knowledgeable, pious, and brave, will be considered as an Imam if he starts an uprising and calls people to himself.

 

Quote

Abu 'Isa al-Warraq has classified the views of the Jarudiyya concerning Mahdawiyya into three categories:

  • Those who believed in the Mahdawiyya of Muhammad b. Qasim al-Taliqani (d. 219/834),
  • And those who believed in the Mahdawiyya of Yahya b. 'Umar and were expecting his Raj'a.

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

https://id.wikishia.net/view/Zaidiyah

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...