Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Is Zaid bin Zain ul Abideen (son of 4th Imam) a good guy or a bad guy?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

So this hadith is making the rounds and i had a debate with a wahhabi. I told him , if the son of Nuh was not pious, why do the sons of the Imams all apparently have to be good people?

He then showed me a hadith. He told me in this Hadith, Zaid basically says to a companion of the Imam, if my father would cool hot food to not burn my tongue when i was an infant, why would he not tell me he was a divinely appointed Imam and all the stuff you Shias claim? So the companion tells Zaid your father the 4th Imam was doing Taqqiyah from you.

It all sounds dodgy honestly. Why would the Imam not teach his own infant son that he was an Imam? Even Nuh warned his son who got drowned. It isn't an excuse on the day of judgement for Nuh to basically say, i didn't warn my son because if he drowned and didn't know at least he would have an excuse.

So a lot of Wahhabis say that the Shia sect basically came about by Kufans who lived far away from the Imams in Medina, making it all up. That is why they were able to go to the children of the Imam like Zaid, and the Imams own children not having a clue about claims their parents made.

But why couldn't Zaid have been a bad guy in this case? The argument the Imam was doing Taqqiyah and did not inform his own son of Haq and Batil sounds nonsensical.

<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>

Al Kafi: https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/4/1/5

5. A number of our people have narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn 'Isa from Ali ibn al-Hakam from Aban who has that al-Ahwal reported to him the following: "Zayd ibn Ali ibn al-Husayn  sent a message to me for a meeting with him when he was in hiding. When I met him, he said, 'O Abu Ja'far, what do you say if someone from us comes to you asking to join us? Will you rise up with him (against the enemies)?' I said, 'If such a person would be your father or brother I would join him.' He then said, 'I want to rise up against these people. Come and join me.' I said, 'No, may Allah make my soul of service to you.' He then said, 'Is it that you distance yourself away from me?' I said, “It is only one soul. If Allah's Authority on earth existed, then those keeping away from you would have saved themselves and those joining you would have faced their destruction. If no Divine Authority existed on earth then people joining and keeping away from you would be the same.'

He (Zayd bin Ali (son of Imam Sajjad as)): then said, 'O Abu Ja'far, I would sit with my father at the same table and he would feed me chunky morsels and cool off for me the hot ones out of kindness and diligent care. Do you think he was not afraid for me from the fire of hell? So he has informed you about religion and did not inform me? "

I said, 'May Allah make my soul of service to you, this also is of the kindness of your father to you. To save you from the fire he did not inform you. He was concerned for you that after having the information you might ignore his guidance and become subject to fire. He informed me also. If I follow I will be safe and I will be destroyed, if I disobeyed (him), for which (my destruction) he was not that much concerned.' "

Then I told him, 'May Allah make my soul of service to you, are you of a higher degree of excellence or the prophets?"

He said, 'It is the prophets.' I said, 'Consider what Ya'qub said to Joseph, "My son do not tell your dream to your brothers. They may plot against you." Why did he not inform the brothers so that they would not plot against Joseph? He hid it from them and so also your father has done; he was afraid for you.' He then said, 'When you say that, I swear to Allah that your friend the Imam  did tell me in Medina that I will be killed and crucified in al-Kunasa and that he has a book with him that lists the people killed and crucified.' "I then went for Hajj and reported the story of Zayd to Abu 'Abd Allah,  and what I said to Zayd. The Imam  said, 'It seems you surrounded him from his front, back, left, right, above and below and did not leave for him any way out!'"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
45 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

Consider what Ya'qub said to Joseph, "My son do not tell your dream to your brothers. They may plot against you." Why did he not inform the brothers so that they would not plot against Joseph? He hid it from them and so also your father has done; he was afraid for you.'

This is a horrible analogy. Yaqub wasn't hiding the right path from his other sons, he was telling Joseph to just be careful showing off to his brothers as they may get jealous.

A better example is Noah to his son, who warned his son about the flood. The son disobeyed and drowned. Noah was not going to say, oh lemme not warn him, if i do he will be liable for blame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Cool  I don't always agree with you but sometimes you have made me rethink my views. Curious if you have time brother if you could help with this?

I am only asking these threads and questions because i am A. Ignorant and B. Want to clear doubts. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

@Cool  I don't always agree with you but sometimes you have made me rethink my views. Curious if you have time brother if you could help with this?

I am only asking these threads and questions because i am A. Ignorant and B. Want to clear doubts. 

 

Salam!

So let me quote another report so that you can learn how to tread between conflicting reports. Here is the report:

الحافظ علي بن محمّد الخزّاز الرازي القمّي في كفاية الأثر ، بإسناده إلى يحيى بن زيد قال : سألت أبي عن الأئمّة ( عليهم السلام ) فقال : الأئمّة اثنا عشر أربعة من الماضين ، وثمانية من الباقين .

قلت : فسمِّهم يا أبت ، قال : أمّا الماضون فعلي بن أبي طالب ، والحسن ، والحسين ، وعلي بن الحسين ( عليهم السلام ) ، وأمّا الباقون فأخي الباقر ، وابنه جعفر الصادق ، وبعده موسى ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده محمّد ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده الحسن ابنه ، وبعده المهدي .

فقلت : يا أبتِ أَلَستَ منهم ؟ قال : لا ، ولكن من العترة ، قلت : فمن أين عرفت أسماءهم ؟ قال : عهد معهود عهده رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) .

Look where is the problem, when you see a report and questions or doubts popped into your mind from that report, it is necessary for you to find the satisfactory answers, so that you can reject the doubts. 

The way you are putting up case after case, doubts after doubts, is not seems good to me. You should present your question in a decent way. The report you shared had words of Zayd al-Shaheed and a companion, the last words attributed to Imam (عليه السلام) are nothing but the praise of that companion, apparently giving him the impression "Wow! You presented an excellent argument!" And you yourself have pointed out critics against the argument:

On 9/28/2023 at 11:16 AM, In Gods Name said:

This is a horrible analogy. Yaqub wasn't hiding the right path from his other sons, he was telling Joseph to just be careful showing off to his brothers as they may get jealous.

A better example is Noah to his son, who warned his son about the flood. The son disobeyed and drowned. Noah was not going to say, oh lemme not warn him, if i do he will be liable for blame.

Lot of ahadith from our books and from the books of zaidiyyah are present in many threads of "minor islamic sects", mentioning the nass of the Imamate of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام), please read them. 

If you are a shia, you must know the "nass" for the Imamate of your 12 Imams first. So that no doubt ever produce in your mind about them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/28/2023 at 6:59 PM, In Gods Name said:

It all sounds dodgy honestly. Why would the Imam not teach his own infant son that he was an Imam? Even Nuh warned his son who got drowned. It isn't an excuse on the day of judgement for Nuh to basically say, i didn't warn my son because if he drowned and didn't know at least he would have an excuse.

Salam All infallible Imams knew about their imamate since birth so therefore it doesn't to receive this teaching from their father which always cursed Ummayads & Abbasids have tried to find who is next Imam in order to martyr him or try change him  so therefore identity of next infallible Imam has been kept as a secret until mratyrdom their father  although through many evidences their fathers have introduced next Imam to their devoted followers in order to their loyal followers introduce next nfallible Imam to shia community after martyrdom of his blessed father.

On 9/28/2023 at 6:59 PM, In Gods Name said:

So a lot of Wahhabis say that the Shia sect basically came about by Kufans who lived far away from the Imams in Medina, making it all up. That is why they were able to go to the children of the Imam like Zaid, and the Imams own children not having a clue about claims their parents made.

This is just comparing apples with oranges because city of Medina always has been  main center of all of infallible Imams which Shias of Kufans just have been consisted a little sahre of Shia community but because their names have been mentioned more than other in history books due to happening more uprising & diversity of people of Kufa  & hardship of controlling of it's diverse community by both  of cursed Ummayads & Abbasids so therefore  always has been a good place for initiating uprising  so therefore Wahabists have created this illusion that it has been a shia main camp but in opposition of false claim of wahabists  they have been in contact with  it infallible Imams during Hajj which majority of all caravans for going to Hajj needed to pass both of Kufa & Basra for returning to their homelands after & before visiting city of Medina which in countless narrations visit of various shia people even from Khorasan region of Iran with infallible Imams which has been farthest location to Medina has been recorded in Shia narrations which wahabists  neglect all of these nreports & narrations just by focusing on Kufa & betrayal of  them . 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/28/2023 at 6:59 PM, In Gods Name said:

But why couldn't Zaid have been a bad guy in this case? The argument the Imam was doing Taqqiyah and did not inform his own son of Haq and Batil sounds nonsensical.

Salam this is just a baseless Wahabi conclusion because in oppositin to your claim Martyr Zaid (رضي الله عنه) always has been praised by all infallible Imams & Shia muslims which Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) specially has endorsed him & his uprising as geniue uprising for returning Haq to Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) & fighting with Batil of Abbasids which his fate about uprising & fate has been predicted as a prophecy before his birth also he knew about his destiny which his fate has been mentioned by Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) right before his uprising .

In this regard, a hadith is adduced, which reports that Zayd consulted with Imam al-Sadiq (a) and the Imam (a) told him, "If you wish to be the one who will be hung in the midden of Kufa, this is the way." Adducing the same hadith, some other scholars hold that, although Zayd truly intended to hand over the caliphate to Imam al-Sadiq (a), the Imam (a) prohibited him from the revolt.

Prophecy of Martyrdom

It is documented that the martyrdom of Zayd has been prophesized by the Infallibles. Imam Husain narrated that his grandfather Hadrat Muhammad (PBUHH) prophesied his death: The Holy Prophet put his sacred hand on my back and said: “O Husain, it will not be long until a man will be born among your descendants. He will be called Zayd; he will be killed as a martyr. On the Day of Resurrection, he and his companions will enter heaven, setting their feet on the necks of the people.”

Quote

Based on a hadith, Allama Tihrani too holds that Zayd's revolt was conducted without the Imam's (a) permission.

According to some hadiths from Imam al-Sadiq (a) and Imam al-Rida (a), Zayd intended to transfer the caliphate to Imam al-Sadiq (a). Al-Shaykh al-Mufid states that Zayd led his revolt to bring to power "the pleased one from the family of the Prophet (s)", and did not seek the caliphate for himself. Al-Allama al-Majlisi attributes this opinion to the majority of Twelver Shiite scholars and adds that he has not seen a different opinion from them.

According to al-Shaykh al-Mufid, when Imam al-Sadiq (a) was informed of the murder of Zayd, he was deeply affected and ordered that an amount of money be distributed among the families of those who had been killed in the revolt.

Quote

It is reported that Zayd's intention was to revenge for the massacre of Karbala, to command good and forbid evil, and to take the caliphate from the Umayyads and hand it over to the rightful successors of the Prophet (s).

Zayd's revolt is considered a step toward the overthrow of the Umayyad rule.

Among the factors that led to the failure of the revolt were the fact that the Kufans did not support him as was expected, the military power of the Umayyads, and the Umayyad agents that had infiltrated among the rebels are mentioned.

 

Quote

The Standpoint of Imam al-Sadiq (a)

Zayd's revolt occurred during the imamate of Imam al-Sadiq (a), but the Imam (a) did not participate in the revolt, and there are no clear statements by Imam al-Sadiq (a) regarding the revolt. Some maintain that the fact that the Imam (a) did not participate in the revolt indicates his disagreement with it, however some others believe that while the Imam (a) was supportive of the revolt, he did not regard it beneficial to participate directly in the revolt. Some scholars such as al-Shahid al-Awwal, Ayatollah Khoei, and Mamaqani believe that Zayd b. Ali was permitted by Imam al-Sadiq (a) to revolt.

Yemeni Thinker:

Zayd ibn Ali Uprising to Correct Religious Misconceptions

Referring to the position of Zayd ibn Ali and the need to emulate these elders and implement his way in life, Abdullah Hammoud Al-Azi said,” holding such conferences will bring the culture of Shia Muslims closer and create a constructive interaction between religions that will build the future of Islam.”

Quote

This Yemeni thinker said,” Such gatherings among the Shia sects incite the enemies of the Ahl al-Bayt (PBUT) to rage and anger because they are constantly sowing division between religions and Muslims, and in order to create this division, they constantly use any means so that the convergence of religions does not happen. They are conspiring so that the problems among religions should not be solved.”

 

Quote

The Yemeni thinker went on to point to the religious faith of Zayd ibn Ali and his other characteristics, and said,” The son of Zayd ibn Ali narrated that my father was a devotee who spent the day in worship and the night in prayer, and he was one of the most eloquent people of his time; his whole life and behavior draws us to God.”

 

Quote

This Yemeni scholar stated that the whole life of Zayd ibn Ali was a Jihad and noted,” Zayd ibn Ali rose to promote the genuine Islam, while the Umayyad had distorted Islam as they liked and had introduced deviant traditions into the religion; therefore the uprising of Zayd ibn Ali was intended to correct concepts among Muslims that existed throughout their lives, and their uprising should not limited to just an armed uprising.”

 

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Uprising_of_Zayd_b._Ali

https://en.al-shia.org/martyrdom-of-zayd-al-shahid/

https://en.hawzahnews.com/news/365575/Zayd-ibn-Ali-Uprising-to-Correct-Religious-Misconceptions

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/29/2023 at 5:47 PM, Cool said:

Salam!

So let me quote another report so that you can learn how to tread between conflicting reports. Here is the report:

الحافظ علي بن محمّد الخزّاز الرازي القمّي في كفاية الأثر ، بإسناده إلى يحيى بن زيد قال : سألت أبي عن الأئمّة ( عليهم السلام ) فقال : الأئمّة اثنا عشر أربعة من الماضين ، وثمانية من الباقين .

قلت : فسمِّهم يا أبت ، قال : أمّا الماضون فعلي بن أبي طالب ، والحسن ، والحسين ، وعلي بن الحسين ( عليهم السلام ) ، وأمّا الباقون فأخي الباقر ، وابنه جعفر الصادق ، وبعده موسى ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده محمّد ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده الحسن ابنه ، وبعده المهدي .

فقلت : يا أبتِ أَلَستَ منهم ؟ قال : لا ، ولكن من العترة ، قلت : فمن أين عرفت أسماءهم ؟ قال : عهد معهود عهده رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) .

Look where is the problem, when you see a report and questions or doubts popped into your mind from that report, it is necessary for you to find the satisfactory answers, so that you can reject the doubts. 

The way you are putting up case after case, doubts after doubts, is not seems good to me. You should present your question in a decent way. The report you shared had words of Zayd al-Shaheed and a companion, the last words attributed to Imam (عليه السلام) are nothing but the praise of that companion, apparently giving him the impression "Wow! You presented an excellent argument!" And you yourself have pointed out critics against the argument:

Lot of ahadith from our books and from the books of zaidiyyah are present in many threads of "minor islamic sects", mentioning the nass of the Imamate of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام), please read them. 

If you are a shia, you must know the "nass" for the Imamate of your 12 Imams first. So that no doubt ever produce in your mind about them. 

Walaikom saleem

Can you translate the Arabic to English for the sake of other viewers, and please explain how it directly addresses the post.

 

thanks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
8 hours ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Salam this is just a baseless Wahabi conclusion because in oppositin to your claim Martyr Zaid (رضي الله عنه) always has been praised by all infallible Imams & Shia muslims which Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) specially has endorsed him & his uprising as geniue uprising for returning Haq to Ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) & fighting with Batil of Abbasids which his fate about uprising & fate has been predicted as a prophecy before his birth also he knew about his destiny which his fate has been mentioned by Imam Sadiq (عليه السلام) right before his uprising .

 

I just gave you a Saheeh hadith from al Kafi where Zaid denies Imamah and tells a companion that his own dad didn't teach him about the concept of Imamah. How is this Wahabi conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/30/2023 at 11:10 AM, In Gods Name said:

Walaikom saleem

Can you translate the Arabic to English for the sake of other viewers, and please explain how it directly addresses the post.

 

thanks 

"Yahya bin Zaid said: I asked my father about the Imams (peace be upon them), and he said: The Imams are twelve, four of the past, and eight of the remaining.

 I said: Name them, father. He said: As for those who passed away, they are Ali bin Abi Talib, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussein, and Ali bin Al-Hussein (peace be upon them), and as for the rest, they are my brother Al-Baqir, and his son Jaafar Al-Sadiq, after him Musa his son, after him Ali his son, after him Muhammad his son, and after him Ali.  His son, after him his son Al-Hassan, and after him Al-Mahdi.

 I said: Father, are you not one of them?  He said: No, but from the family. I said: From where did you know their names?  He said: A covenant that was known to the Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family)."

Do I still need to elaborate how the above hadith contradicts the one you posted? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Cool said:

"Yahya bin Zaid said: I asked my father about the Imams (peace be upon them), and he said: The Imams are twelve, four of the past, and eight of the remaining.

 I said: Name them, father. He said: As for those who passed away, they are Ali bin Abi Talib, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussein, and Ali bin Al-Hussein (peace be upon them), and as for the rest, they are my brother Al-Baqir, and his son Jaafar Al-Sadiq, after him Musa his son, after him Ali his son, after him Muhammad his son, and after him Ali.  His son, after him his son Al-Hassan, and after him Al-Mahdi.

 I said: Father, are you not one of them?  He said: No, but from the family. I said: From where did you know their names?  He said: A covenant that was known to the Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family)."

Do I still need to elaborate how the above hadith contradicts the one you posted? 

 

 

Barakallahoo feek0m

Could you provide the chain of narrators and grading here? It would be highly unusual to find an authentic narration pre-dating the 12th Imam mentioning the imams by names, when the shias themselves imam from imam were confused as to who the next would be, but centuries before Zaid knows it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Could you provide the chain of narrators and grading here?

Here is the hadith with complete chain:

حدّثنا أبو الحسن محمّد بن جعفر بن محمّد التميمي المعروف بابن النجّار النحوي الكوفي، عن محمّد بن القاسم بن زكريا المحاربي، قال حدّثني هشام بن يونس، قال حدّثني القاسم بن خليفة، عن يحيى بن زيد، قال سألت أبي عليه السّلام عن الأئمّة، فقال الأئمّة اثنا عشر، أربعة من الماضين و ثمانية من الباقين، قلت فسمّهم يا أبه، فقال أمّا الماضين فعلي بن أبي طالب و الحسن و الحسين و عليّ بن الحسين، و من الباقين أخي الباقر، و جعفر الصادق ابنه، و بعده موسى ابنه، و بعده عليّ ابنه و بعده محمّد ابنه و بعده عليّ ابنه، و بعده الحسن ابنه، و بعده المهدي، فقلت يا أبه أ لست منهم؟ قال لا و لكنّي من العترة، قلت فمن أين عرفت أساميهم؟ قال عهد معهود عهده إلينا رسول اللّه صلّى اللّه عليه و آله و سلّم.

2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

It would be highly unusual to find an authentic narration pre-dating the 12th Imam mentioning the imams by names, when the shias themselves imam from imam were confused as to who the next would be, but centuries before Zaid knows it.

This reflects your ignorance of the hadith literature. Don't you know the hadith of Jabir bin Abdullah (رضي الله عنه) where he conveyed salam of Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to Imam al-Baqar (عليه السلام) when he met him? 

So Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari knew the names of Imams from Ali (عليه السلام) to Imam al-Baqar and Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) not only told him the names but also said him to deliver his salam to Imam al-Baqar (عليه السلام) . 

Even Sunni have ahadith in their books related to number of Imams/caliphs i.e., 12. The name of the 12th is known unanimously by all the Muslims. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Cool said:

This reflects your ignorance of the hadith literature. Don't you know the hadith of Jabir bin Abdullah (رضي الله عنه) where he conveyed salam of Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) to Imam al-Baqar (عليه السلام) when he met him? 

So Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari knew the names of Imams from Ali (عليه السلام) to Imam al-Baqar and Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) not only told him the names but also said him to deliver his salam to Imam al-Baqar (عليه السلام) . 

Even Sunni have ahadith in their books related to number of Imams/caliphs i.e., 12. The name of the 12th is known unanimously by all the Muslims. 

Interestingly, i've gone through this and that Hadith itself is highly, highly questionable for several reasons. I will make a thread on this hadith later. There is just no way a hadith with all twelve names was circulating around from the time of the Prophet, when each group of the companions of the Imams, one by one included some of the closest ones were in confusion often as to who was the next imam. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/29/2023 at 5:47 PM, Cool said:

 

 

الحافظ علي بن محمّد الخزّاز الرازي القمّي في كفاية الأثر ، بإسناده إلى يحيى بن زيد قال : سألت أبي عن الأئمّة ( عليهم السلام ) فقال : الأئمّة اثنا عشر أربعة من الماضين ، وثمانية من الباقين .

قلت : فسمِّهم يا أبت ، قال : أمّا الماضون فعلي بن أبي طالب ، والحسن ، والحسين ، وعلي بن الحسين ( عليهم السلام ) ، وأمّا الباقون فأخي الباقر ، وابنه جعفر الصادق ، وبعده موسى ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده محمّد ابنه ، وبعده علي ابنه ، وبعده الحسن ابنه ، وبعده المهدي .

فقلت : يا أبتِ أَلَستَ منهم ؟ قال : لا ، ولكن من العترة ، قلت : فمن أين عرفت أسماءهم ؟ قال : عهد معهود عهده رسول الله ( صلى الله عليه وآله ) .

 

I enjoy your research, but can you clarify which book this has come from? I can't seem to find a reliable source or legitimate book of acceptable hadith with this in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
14 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

I just gave you a Saheeh hadith from al Kafi where Zaid denies Imamah and tells a companion that his own dad didn't teach him about the concept of Imamah. How is this Wahabi conclusion?

Martyr Zaid (رضي الله عنه) never has denied Imamah while Wahabists use anything to deny it also you have said that the imam has not taught his own infant son about his  Imamate which is another Wahabi acusation . 

 

On 9/28/2023 at 6:59 PM, In Gods Name said:

It all sounds dodgy honestly. Why would the Imam not teach his own infant son that he was an Imam? Even Nuh warned his son who got drowned. It isn't an excuse on the day of judgement for Nuh to basically say, i didn't warn my son because if he drowned and didn't know at least he would have an excuse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

There is just no way a hadith with all twelve names was circulating around from the time of the Prophet, when each group of the companions of the Imams, one by one included some of the closest ones were in confusion often as to who was the next imam.

lol, isn't it become more interesting when you consider that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) introduced the first, second, third & mention the details of the 12th Imam but hide the names of Imams from the Progeny of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام)? 

How it seems to you that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) mentioned the numbers of Imams i.e., 12 according to Bukhari & Muslim, people then asked who were they, Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) replied all of them from Quraysh but he never disclosed the name of anyone, not even to his closest companions? He (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) can mention their tribe, their belonging, but not their names lol. 

So mentioning the tribe is acceptable for you but when it comes to mentioning names, you start questioning!

It is acceptable to you that Prophet said Ammar (رضي الله عنه) will be killed by rebel group, Ammar would be calling them to paradise and they would be calling him to hell. 

And how is it that Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) not even knew the names of those upon whom he (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) was appointed as witness? 

وَجَاهِدُوا فِي اللَّهِ حَقَّ جِهَادِهِ ۚ هُوَ اجْتَبَاكُمْ وَمَا جَعَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ مِنْ حَرَجٍ ۚ مِلَّةَ أَبِيكُمْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ ۚ هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مِنْ قَبْلُ وَفِي هَٰذَا لِيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ شَهِيدًا عَلَيْكُمْ وَتَكُونُوا شُهَدَاءَ عَلَى النَّاسِ

22:78)

 

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

I enjoy your research, but can you clarify which book this has come from? I can't seem to find a reliable source or legitimate book of acceptable hadith with this in. 

The book name is mentioned in the Arabic Text:

10 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

 

الحافظ علي بن محمّد الخزّاز الرازي القمّي في كفاية الأثر

Above you can find the writer as well as the name of book which I highlighted. 

And here is the link of that book:

http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/الكتب/1154_كفاية-الأثر

And in the following link you will find details about the writer and his authenticity, from whom he learned and narrated etc:

https://ar.al-shia.org/الشيخ-علي-بن-محمد-الخزاز/

Edited by Cool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/30/2023 at 7:43 PM, Cool said:

"Yahya bin Zaid said: I asked my father about the Imams (peace be upon them), and he said: The Imams are twelve, four of the past, and eight of the remaining.

 I said: Name them, father. He said: As for those who passed away, they are Ali bin Abi Talib, Al-Hassan, Al-Hussein, and Ali bin Al-Hussein (peace be upon them), and as for the rest, they are my brother Al-Baqir, and his son Jaafar Al-Sadiq, after him Musa his son, after him Ali his son, after him Muhammad his son, and after him Ali.  His son, after him his son Al-Hassan, and after him Al-Mahdi.

 I said: Father, are you not one of them?  He said: No, but from the family. I said: From where did you know their names?  He said: A covenant that was known to the Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family)."

Do I still need to elaborate how the above hadith contradicts the one you posted? 

 

 

I am going to dissect the source soon. But this hadith is highly suspicious:

A: Portrays Zaid, who did not accept the commands of Imam Baqir , as giving in to the divine Imamah belief. This is what someone may fabricate to try to make it look Zaid was in line

B: The companions of the Imams themselves in our literature were confused about who the next would be. It was often revealed late or near the time the next was due right @Ashvazdanghe

How could the names have been known and be made so public, endangering the Imams, and appearing to fly over the heads of the companions of the Imams each one by one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

How could the names have been known and be made so public, endangering the Imams, and appearing to fly over the heads of the companions of the Imams each one by one.

Salam martyring of all infallible Imams by  cursed ummayads & Abbassids is a strong proof that both of them have wanted to get rid of infallible imams which they have tried to kill infallible Imams since their birth so therefore keeping their names would keep them safe from their treats :einstein:

only few handpicked trustworthy companions of infallible Imams knew name of their next infallible Imam in order to stop confusion between their followers which  wahabists have exaggerated about confusion of their followers about incident of separating of Ismailis from Twelvers which after that there was no confusion between Shia community . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

B: The companions of the Imams themselves in our literature were confused about who the next would be. It was often revealed late or near the time the next was due right

 

7 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

How could the names have been known and be made so public, endangering the Imams, and appearing to fly over the heads of the companions of the Imams each one by one.

Imam Musa b. Ja'far al-Kazim (a)

The Will of Imam al-Sadiq (a) and the Confusion of Some Shi'a

It is mentioned in the references that due to the pressures made by Abbasids and in order to guard protect Imam al-Kazim's (a) life, Imam al-Sadiq (a) introduced five people, including the Abbasid caliph as his vicegerent.[29] Although, Imam al-Sadiq (a) had introduced the Imam after himself to his special companions several times, his introduction of the five people made the situation perplexing to some extent for Shi'a. In this period, some distinguished companions of Imam al-Sadiq (a) such as Mu'min al-Taq and Hisham b. Salim too became doubtful. They first went to 'Abd Allah al-Aftah who had claimed the Imamate and asked him about zakat. But, his answers did not convince them. Then, they visited Musa b. Ja'far (a) and were convinced of his answers and accepted his imamate.[30]

[29]  Pīshwāyī, Sīriy-i pīshwāyān, p.414

[30]  al-Kashshī, Rijāl, p.282-283

Contemporary Shi'a Sects

Some Shi'a of the time of Imam al-Sadiq (a) believed in the imamate of his son Isma'il and although he passed away while Imam al-Sadiq (a) was alive, they did not believe his demise and still believed in his imamate. After martyrdom of Imam al-Sadiq (a), some who were disappointed about the imamate of Isma'il considered his son Muhammad b. Isma'il as Imam and were later known as Isma'ilis.

After the martyrdom of Imam al-Sadiq (a), some others followed 'Abd Allah al-Aftah and were known as Fatahiyya. Among other sects of the time of Imam (a) were Nawusiyya, following a person called Nawus who considered Imam al-Sadiq (a) as the last Imam, and another group who believed in the imamate of Muhammad b. Ja'far, known as al-Dibaj.[31]

[31] Nawbakhtī, Firaq al-Shīʿa, p. 66-79.

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Imam_Musa_b._Ja'far_al-Kazim_(a)

Hudayth (mother of Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari (a))

Quote

Ḥudayth (Arabic: حُدَیث) was Imam al-Hadi's (a) wife and Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari's (a) mother. She was the executor of Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari's (a) will administrating his endowments and charities and a medium between Imam al-Mahdi (a) and people. According to Shiite sources, she was an honorable and pious woman. Since Ḥudayth was Imam al-Mahdi's (a) grandmother, she came to be known as "Jadda" (grandmother). She is buried in the holy shrine of Imam al-Hadi (a) and Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari (a).

 

Imam Hasan al-'Askari's (a) Executor

Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari (a) appointed his mother, Hudayth, as the executor of his will and the administrator of his endowments and charities. According to some historical sources, Ahmad b. Ibrahim said that:

In 262/875-6, I visited Hakima, the daughter of Muhammad b. 'Ali al-Rida (Imam Muhammad al-Taqi (a)), Abu l-Hasan al-'Askari's sister in Medina and talked with her about some secret issues and asked her who she takes as the Imam. She said: such and such the son of Hasan (a), and named him. I told her: did you see him or hear about him? She said: I heard about him from Abu Muhammad (Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari) (a) in a letter he wrote for his mother. I asked Hakima: where is that child? She said: he is hiding. I asked: so who should Shiites refuge to? She responded: to his grandmother, Abu Muhammad's (a) mother. I asked: should I follow someone who appointed a woman as his executor? She replied: Imam Hasan al-'Askari (a) followed Imam al-Husayn (a) who apparently addressed his will to his sister, Zaynab bt. 'Ali (a) in order to save Imam al-Sajjad (a)'s life. She then said: you are an informed person. Have you not heard in hadiths that the ninth son of Husayn (a) is alive while his heritage will be distributed?[15]
 
 Kitab al-Ghaybaal-Shaykh al-Tusi wrote that Imam Hasan al-'Askari (a) appointed his mother as the executor of his will to hide the birth of his son. Al-Tusi goes on to say that the same thing was done by Imam al-Sadiq (a) who appointed five people as his executors, one of whom was a woman called Hamida Barbariyya.[16]
 

Dispute with Ja'far

Before his demise, Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari (a) sent his mother to the hajj pilgrimage.[12] When she heard that Imam al-Hasan al-'Askari (a) passed away, she left Medina to Samarra. When she learned that her other son, Ja'far al-Kadhdhab claimed the position of imamate for himself and seized all of his father's heritage, she complained to the ruler,[13] and the judge ruled in her favor. After a while, Ja'far lost his money, and Jadda had to pay for his living expenses, as well as those of his children and animals.[14]

 
https://en.wikishia.net/view/Hudayth_(mother_of_Imam_al-Hasan_al-'Askari_(a))
 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

How could the names have been known and be made so public, endangering the Imams, and appearing to fly over the heads of the companions of the Imams each one by one.

Al-Mansur al-'Abbasi

Imprisonment of Descendants of Imam al-Hasan (a)

Al-Mansur al-Dawaniqi was the first man who brought conflicts between Abbasids and Alids in the time of his caliphate, while they had a close relationship before.[15]

Also al-Mansur ordered to arrest and imprison all the descendants of Imam al-Hasan (a), except for al-Nafs al-Zakiyya and Ibrahim (the sons of 'Abd Allah b. Mahd) who managed to hide. He ordered to shackle them bring them to al-Hayra and imprison them in a harsh situation.[16]

Treatment of Imam al-Sadiq (a)

Summoning Imam al-Sadiq (a)

The last years of Imam al-Sadiq's (a) life coincided with the rule of al-Mansur. Imam (a) was hugely influential as a spiritual figure among Banu Hashim. According to Asad Haydar in his book Imam al-Sadiq wa l-Madahib al-Arba'a, Imam's popularity was increasing all over the Islamic territories. Knowledgeable men and scholars often came to meet him and they held discussions and asked him their questions. The influence of Imam (a) concerned al-Mansur. As a result, he summoned Imam (a) to Baghdad to keep a close eye on him; he even thought of martyring Imam (a).[22] Al-Sayyid b. Tawus stated in his book Muhaj al-da'awat wa manhaj al-'ibadat that al-Mansur regularly summoned Imam al-Sadiq (a) to Baghdad and Kufa.[23]

[22] Asad Ḥaydar, al-Imām al-Ṣādiq wa al-madhāhib al-arbaʿa, vol. 5-6, p. 46-47.

[23]  Ibn Ṭāwūs, Muhaj al-daʿawāt wa manhaj al-ʿibādāt, p. 184-215.

Imam al-Sadiq (a) usually refused to go to al-Mansur's palace, expect on some occasions; al-Mansur mostly complained about rejections he got from Imam (a).[24] When he complained to Imam (a) about his infrequent visits to his palace, Imam replied: "I have done nothing to be afraid of you, and your deeds in this world do not make me optimistic about your situation in the Hereafter. Your current situation is nothing delightful to congratulate you; you do not regard it a misery to offer my condolences to you; then why should I come to visit you?"[25]

[24] Nūrī, Khātima al-mustadrak al-wasāʾil, vol. 12, p. 307.

[25] Irbilī, Kashf al-ghumma fī maʿrifat al-aʾimma, vol. 2, p. 740.

Martyrdom of Imam al-Sadiq (a)

Al-Mansur held grudges against Alids and tried very hard to keep a close eye on Imam al-Sadiq (a); he did not let Imam (a) to live freely. On the other hand, Imam (a), just like his fathers, openly considered himself as the Imam of Muslims and believed others have usurped the power by force. It brought dangers to al-Mansur. Then he was looking for the right time to martyr Imam (a).

According to sources, al-Mansur considered Imam al-Sadiq (a) a major obstacle in his way and it is said he took an oath to kill Imam (a).[26] Eventually Imam al-Sadiq (a) was martyred on Shawwal 25148/December 14765 According to Ibn Shahrashub in al-Manaqib, Imam (a) was poisoned by al-Mansur.[27]

[26] Rāwandī, al-Kharāʾij wa l-jarāʾiḥ, vol. 2, p. 647; Shāmī, al-Durr al-naẓīm, p. 633.

[27] bn Shahrāshūb, Manāqib Āl Abī Ṭālib, vol. 4, p. 280.

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Al-Mansur_al-'Abbasi

Imam Ja'far b. Muhammad al-Sadiq (a)

Quote

Will

Many hadiths indicate that Imam al-Sadiq (a) introduced Imam al-Kazim (a) as his successor and the executor of his will to his close companions several times.[110] However, because of the persecutions of the Abbasids and to protect the life of Imam al-Kazim (a), the Imam (a) mentioned five people in his will, including the Abbasid caliph, as its executors.[111]

[110] Kashshī, Rijāl, p. 282, 283.

[111]  Pīshwāyī, Sīra-yi pīshwāyān, p. 414.

As a result, even some of the prominent companions of the Imam (a) became hesitant for a short time about who his successor was. Some of them first went to 'Abd Allah al-Aftah and asked him questions, but his answers did not convince them. Afterward, they met Imam al-Kazim (a) and were satisfied by his answers implying that he was the true successor of Imam al-Sadiq (a).[112]

[112] Kashshī, Rijāl, p. 282, 283.

https://en.wikishia.net/view/Imam_Ja'far_b._Muhammad_al-Sadiq_(a)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

B. The companions of the Imams themselves in our literature were confused about who the next would be.

Which companions were confused in identifying the Imamate of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام)? 

You can cite the case of Muhammad bin Hanfiyyah which ended up in a miracle where "hajr e aswad" witnessed the Imamate of Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام). 

16 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

A: Portrays Zaid, who did not accept the commands of Imam Baqir , as giving in to the divine Imamah belief. This is what someone may fabricate to try to make it look Zaid was in line

 First of all you need to prove that Imam's words which he uttered to Zayd al Shaheed, were his commands & not advise. 

Secondly, there are many ahadith, from Imam al-Sadiq (عليه السلام) to Imam al-Rada (عليه السلام) where all of them defended Zayd al-Shaheed and mentioned his great station:

لمّا بلغ قتـل زيد إلى الاِمام الصـادق (عليه ‌السلام) قال: «إنّا لله وإنّا إليه راجعون، عند الله أحتسب عمي إنّه كان نعم العم. إنّ عمي كان رجلًا لدنيانا وآخرتنا، مضى والله عمي شهيدًا كشهداء استشهدوا مع رسول الله وعلي والحسين صلوات الله عليهم

الصدوق: عيون أخبار الرضا (عليه ‌السلام): 1 / 252 ح6، الباب 25.

روى الصدوق في معاني الأخبار، قال: كنّا عند أبي عبد الله فذكر زيد، ومن خرج معه، فهمَّ بعض أصحاب المجلس أن يتناوله، فانتهره أبو عبد الله، وقال: «مهلًا ليس لكم أن تدخلوا فيما بيننا إلاّ بسبيل خير، إنّه لم تمت نفس منّا إلاّ وتدركه السعادة قبل أن تخرج نفسه ولو بفواق الناقة»، قلت: وما فواق الناقة؟ قال: «حلابها»

معاني الأخبار: 392، بحار الأنوار: 46 / 179

روى الراوندي عن الحسن بن راشد قال: ذكرت زيد بن علي فتنقَّصته عند أبي عبد الله (عليه ‌السلام) فقال: «لا تفعل، رحم الله عمي أتى أبي، فقال: إنّي أُريد الخروج على هذا الطاغية. فقال: لا تفعل، فإنّي أخاف أن تكون المقتول المصلوب على ظهر الكوفة – إلى أن قال الاِمام (عليه ‌السلام) للحسن: – يا حسن، إنّا أهل بيت لا يخرج أحدنا من الدنيا حتى يقرّ لكل ذي فضل فضله»

الخرائج والجرائح: 232، البحار: 46 / 185.

روى الكشـي في ترجمة السيـد الحميري عن فضيل الرسان، قال: دخلت على أبي عبد الله (عليه ‌السلام) بعد ما قتل زيد بن علي (عليه ‌السلام)، فادخلت بيتًا في جوف بيت، وقال لي: «يا فضيل، قتل عمي زيد بن علي؟» قلت: نعم جعلت فداك، فقال: «رحمه ‌الله، أما إنّه كان موَمنًا وكان عارفًا وكان عالمًا، وكان صدوقًا، أما إنّه لو ظفر لوفى، أما إنّه لو ملك لعرف كيف يضعها»،

الكشي: الرجال: 242 برقم 133، وذكر قسمًا من عينية السيد الحميري المعروفة

Apart from the above and other numerous reports, the book كفاية الاثر itself has many reports that Zayd al-Shaheed was not claiming the Imamate. Even the evidences are there in the books of Zaidiyyah too. 

Lastly, those who say that Zayd al-Shaheed was an Imam, they don't know what Imamate is! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Nobody as yet, has been able to explain the alleged authentic hadith in al Kafi, where Zayd b. Ali b Hussain (Imam Sajjad), tells Sahib ul Taq that his father did not teach him about Imamah. 

In response, Sahib al Taq claims Imam Sajjad was doing Taqqiyah from his own son!

Despite the fact that Nuh warned his son, despite the fact the Quran commands us to warn and save our own families.

I still believe in chosen Imams, but this needs explaining.

Zayd, the son of Imam Sajjad, Abdallah the son of Imam Sadiq, Jafar the brother of Imam Askari , so many sons of the Imams appear to not behave as though they knew anything about Imamah, whereas their followers in Kufa, miles away from Medina where the Ahlulbayt returned post Kerbala , do know.

Something very fishy is going on here.

Edited by In Gods Name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, In Gods Name said:

Nobody as yet, has been able to explain the alleged authentic hadith in al Kafi, where Zayd b. Ali b Hussain (Imam Sajjad), tells Sahib ul Taq that his father did not teach him about Imamah. 

You won't accept any explanation because your agenda just based on denial of Imamate of any infallible Imams which if someone gives you  hundreds of  explanations at the end you will repeat your nonsense . :blabla:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
15 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

You won't accept any explanation because your agenda just based on denial of Imamate of any infallible Imams which if someone gives you  hundreds of  explanations at the end you will repeat your nonsense . :blabla:

I believe in the Imamate /leadership of the Ahlulbayt based on the Muttawatir tradition of Hadith al-Thaqalayn.

However, nobody has thus far come close to explaining precisely why, in this saheeh Hadith, Zayd denies Imamah, nor the ludicrous justification by Sahib al Taq.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

I believe in the Imamate /leadership of the Ahlulbayt based on the Muttawatir tradition of Hadith al-Thaqalayn.

Ok but it appears that you are not getting rid of your ex- Imam Ibn Taimiyyah. 

4 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

nobody has thus far come close to explaining precisely why, in this saheeh Hadith, Zayd denies Imamah,

Well keep holding this "saheeh" hadith and keep scratching your head lol. The other sahih ahadith which mentions you that not only the Zayd al-Shaheed but his son too, well aware of Imam of his time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are two claims raised by Zaidiyyah:

1. Zaid al-Shaheed claimed imamate for himself.

2. Zaid al-Shaheed was unaware of Imam of his time.

Both of these claims can easily be refuted from the books of Zaidiyyah, from the reports narrated by Zaid al-Shaheed himself;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 10/24/2023 at 8:14 PM, Guest Cool said:

There are two claims raised by Zaidiyyah:

1. Zaid al-Shaheed claimed imamate for himself.

2. Zaid al-Shaheed was unaware of Imam of his time.

Both of these claims can easily be refuted from the books of Zaidiyyah, from the reports narrated by Zaid al-Shaheed himself;

Salam,

According to an authentic hadith in Kitab al-Kabi, Sahib al-Taq, the Kufan, clearly narrates an exchange he had with Zaid, where Zaid clearly states his father did not teach him Imamah.

Sahib al-Taq makes the ludicrous claim Imam Zain ul Abideen didn't teach his own son out of Taqqiyah.

Is this report not Saheeh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, In Gods Name said:

Nobody has taken this seriously.

One person has mass copied and pasted irrelevant replies.

One has used ?weak ahadith or hadith not relevant

 

This is something I would want answered as well. Obedience of an imam is obligatory as he has divine authority and so, Zayd should be admonished for his uprising as imam al baqir discouraged him from going. Or alternatively if he wasn't aware of his brother's position, did he die a death of jahiliyya?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 10/2/2023 at 3:09 AM, In Gods Name said:

B: The companions of the Imams themselves in our literature were confused about who the next would be. It was often revealed late or near the time the next was due right @Ashvazdanghe

Because hadiths of `twelve` imams come in `BOOKS` that not everyone had access to.
It was only narrated by very khaas companions of Aima (عليه السلام) due to Taqqiyah.
It was very hard for shias to save their lives brother they were being caught and killed.

So it's highly possible that those companions never had access / or got access to some books later in life. Things were not accessible to everyone back in the days like you or me have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
On 9/28/2023 at 9:16 PM, In Gods Name said:

This is a horrible analogy. Yaqub wasn't hiding the right path from his other sons, he was telling Joseph to just be careful showing off to his brothers as they may get jealous.

A better example is Noah to his son, who warned his son about the flood. The son disobeyed and drowned. Noah was not going to say, oh lemme not warn him, if i do he will be liable for blame.

so apparently if this `SINGLE` wahid narration has horrible analogies, makes no sense, then why're you making a big deal out of it when you've Mutawatir evidence for Imamah in Quran and that its duty of Imam to convey the message. Doesn't this narration go against Quran and Sunnah? If yes then why shall we make a big deal out of it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother @In Gods Name first you need to clarify why the hadeeth of son of Zayd (Yahya) weak.
This Saheeh / Weak verdict on hadith by following opinions of scholars coming 100s of years after actual narrators is baseless.
Classical scholars never followed this methodology.

I Understand the confusion regarding a hadith from Al-Kafi, but it doesn't mean that you can discredit any hadith you want. Author of Book Kifayah Al Athr was praised by Najashi and many others that he's from among jaleel ul qadr scholars.

Now we need to look into muqaddama of book to know why he has authored it in first place and then probably something can be said about it.

There are alot of problems with the `matn` of hadith from Al-Kafi you've quoted. It just doesn't fit the mutawatir evidence and Ayahs we have the explain the the purpose of an Imam. Also if Imam Ali ibn hussein (عليه السلام) feared Zayd would go astray and that's why didn't tell him about Imam Baqir (عليه السلام), why did Imam Baqir (عليه السلام) did it afterwards? Besides you highlighted some of the analogies just don't make sense.

So we are not going to give priority to this narration because of the zahiri faults it has in its matn.
Imam (عليه السلام) knows better about it and why was it said. So do not reject it, rather leave it and follow what has authentically reached you via Quran & Sunnah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

besides guess what i found in Introduction of Kitab Kifayah Al athrimage.png.673b8fd9a49ea6039c6ef97b493bb061.png

@In Gods Name the author says that he has mentioned hadiths that prove imamah of 12 imams in narrations with authentic chains.

So hadith brother Cool quoted is Sahih. See that's why i told you we first need to read introduction of the book to know what the book is about.
Therefore Cool's narration is not weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
9 hours ago, Syed Ali Mehdi Shah Naqvi said:

So it's highly possible that those companions never had access / or got access to some books later in life. Things were not accessible to everyone back in the days like you or me have.

Imagine how the Imams were very careful how they approach the people, fearing that they and their followers will be persecuted. Does it make any sense to reveal all the Imams names to masses of their followers where it can easily reach to enemy and they will surely know which Imam is next and thus they will surely kill all those with same name. 

Even appointing the next Imam should be very secretive because you don't want the enemy know with certainty the next Imam so they will surely kill him. 

People need to understand that they were living with an Islamic Ummah who were very hostile to Prophet family and their lineage. Killing one imam is cutting the whole 12 imam chain, so Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) did protect them. 

Don't forget what Jews did to their own prophets, even they were persecuted and killed. At time Prophet Elijah (عليه السلام) went to hidden because of the jews killing their prophets. 

Edited by Abu Nur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member
7 hours ago, Abu Nur said:

Imagine how the Imams were very careful how they approach the people, fearing that they and their followers will be persecuted. Does it make any sense to reveal all the Imams names to masses of their followers where it can easily reach to enemy and they will surely know which Imam is next and thus they will surely kill all those with same name. 

Even appointing the next Imam should be very secretive because you don't want the enemy know with certainty the next Imam so they will surely kill him. 

People need to understand that they were living with an Islamic Ummah who were very hostile to Prophet family and their lineage. Killing one imam is cutting the whole 12 imam chain, so Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) did protect them. 

Don't forget what Jews did to their own prophets, even they were persecuted and killed. At time Prophet Elijah (عليه السلام) went to hidden because of the jews killing their prophets. 

Salam brother,

There's no doubt the Imams had to be very careful. However, if you look into this in detail it wasn't just the companions on the outskirts that were often confused as to who the next Imams was, but some of the biggest, closest companions of the imams were often confused.

If you also look at the discussions the bona-fide companions had, they never referenced the Hadith allegedly where the twelve imams were named.

So i agree with you in a way, it would have made no sense for the twelve to be forenamed, because such a Hadith would have undoubtedly become Mashoor and used by the followers of the Imams as Daleel every time there was a split when the next Imam came.

Therefore, it makes very little to no sense for the ahadith to exist mentioning all twelve by name, and looking at the ahadith, it doesn't even appear the top companions of each Imam were even aware of this ahadith, given the mass confusion that followed

<>

However, going back to the topic of the thread, we need to try to reconcile why some of the closest family members of the Imams appeared to be completely ignorant of Imamah. In the Saheeh Hadith, Zayd explicitly tells the Kufan, Sahib al-Taq, that my own Father, Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) was so careful and loved me so much that he would cool morsels of food before putting them in my mouth. How could a father that loving who could not even bear that my tounge be burnt, not fear me on account of the fire of Hell?

Sahib al-Taq, the Kufan, gives the most ignorant reply i have ever read in a Hadith. 

What's even worse, Zayd had access to his father, Imam Sajjad, who resided in Medina. 

 

This gives us four possibilities:

1. Sahib al-Taq, or someone in that chain is a liar, or the Asl or book it came from was infiltrated 

2. Zayd is a lying Kuffar who knew about Imamah from Imam Sajjad but lied

3. Zayd was telling the truth, Imam Sajjad mentioned nothing about Divine Imamah, and it is a creation of the Kufans who geographically lived in i.e. Imamah

4. The Imam never taught his own son the Haq and truth

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...