Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
faithmuslima

Approval of the concept of 'wilaya mutlaqa'...

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Salam Alaykum.

The main problem is that Sayid Khumayni ra.gif came out with this theory (mutlaqa) and although the Overwhelming majority of Ahlil Khibra refused it, they are asked to follow it? How can that be? You bind Ulamahs whose ijtihad hasn't even bound them to that. Moreover, we have to look at Ijma' we are Usooli.

If you don't mind, please lay out exactly who refused wilaya mutlaqa when the concept was first proposed by Imam Khomeini (QS). Who accepted it? Nothing without a reference and date please.

Shukran,

Wassalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(salam)

(bismillah)

With all due respect, sister have you not noticed that Shiaboy doesnt know what he is talking about? He constantly has to seek guidance on how to respond. This is why he always makes responses saying "Etc Etc, Ill explain later." Or he will make a general comment and when asked to explain it will take him days? He reminds me of a NON Wilayah version of Shabbir(May Allah Guide Him)

With Regards,

(salam)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Not that I care to respond to insults, it has never been of my concerns. However, keep in mind that the way you behave shows the school of thought you belong to. I am not ANTI or NON wilayah, I said the system works but isn't the most efficient. If you feel that I need to seek guidance to respond, msn with me and ask whatever question you want, you'll get answers to what I know and "I don't know" as an answer when I don't. Here it is, I've laid down the invitation again: sayidshiaboy@hotmail.com.

With regards to sister Faithmuslima's request, how about we take it step by step? I do not have access to the books right now, but how about you name a scholar of the time, and I'll bring forth his stance as we go? I am also willing to go through the revolution in the same fashion.

With all due respect bro Al-Maisi, bring forth any question or topic if you don't want to MSN and I'll answer you within 2 days time maximum (I am a busy person just for the record). Again, I stand by everything I have said and if you MSN you'll see that I have nothing but my keyboard to back me up.

Just don't expect me to answer instantly on a forum when I am a full-time student with a full-time job.

Fi Aman Allah

Edited by Shiaboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam Alaykum.

With regards to sister Faithfulmuslima's request, how about we take it step by step? I do not have access to the books right now, but how about you name a scholar of the time, and I'll bring forth his stance as we go?

I can always wait for you to gather your sources. I'd rather you provide the info, since you are the person who made the statement. I'd like to get an overall thorough response, instead of picking and choosing, b/c that would leave blanks. I hope you don't mind.

Also, when you say, "the majority of ahlul khibara refused it," you are using the past tense. What are things like presently? And did you not say that Ayat. Shirazi was the only person who supported Imam Khomeini (towards the beginning) at the time? Is it the majority, or all except Ayat. Shirazi who disapproved?

Thanks,

Wassalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam Alaykum.

I can always wait for you to gather your sources.  I'd rather you provide the info, since you are the person who made the statement.  I'd like to get an overall thorough response, instead of picking and choosing, b/c that would leave blanks.  I hope you don't mind.

Also, when you say, "the majority of ahlul khibara refused it," you are using the past tense.  What are things like presently?  And did you not say that Ayat. Shirazi was the only person who supported Imam Khomeini (towards the beginning) at the time?  Is it the majority, or all except Ayat. Shirazi who disapproved? 

Thanks,

Wassalam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Ok, I'll go for it but I cannot cover the entire scope that's why I would rather you bring forth a name. Anyhow, we'll see how it goes. With regards to the last question, Sayid Shirazi (ra) was the first Marja' to back Sayid Khumayni (ra) concretely and practically when other turbaned were cursing Imam Khumayni (ra).

At first when the 30 Ulamah received the letters, 29 refused or at least didn't pledge bay3ah. After that it got flowing from Iraq (Karbala to be precise).

I have to run now, I will start on this thread by monday Insha'Allah.

PS: if people start insulting, I will retrieve myself from the thread and invite you to

PM me instead.

Fi Aman Allah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam Alaykum.

Maybe start us off by listing the 29 'aalims who disapproved, giving the date and reference please.  I'm assuming the 30th 'aalim is Ayat. Shirazi? 

Thanks,

Wassalam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Yes, that is correct with regards of the 30th Alim being Sayid Shirazi (ra). It would save me a lot of time if I could find Sheikh Ali Kadhimi (ha)'s phone number in Iran as he was the enlightened Alim to have received the letters. I will look into that, with regards to references, I will check Sayid Hamid Rouhani (ra)'s book on the revolution because it may be there. I know the fatwas of those who participated eventually are there and I'll try to scan some pages.

With regards to dates, that I cannot give you accurately because I myself have been searching forever with bits and pieces and sometimes contradicting views from different parties.

I'm at School right now (apparently I'm addicted to this place!, which is the last thing I need at this time) but starting Monday, I will randomly select a Alim and we can discuss his stance. However, keep in mind that some Ulamahs have said very harsh things in the process so Insha'Allah it won't cause too much harm. With regards to today's Scholars, most scholars from Iraq (students of Najaf or Karbala) do not accept Wilayah Mutlaqa. I won't put out names yet.

Fi Aman Allah

Your bro and servant, Shiaboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salam Alaykum.

Before randomely selecting a 'Alim, would you mind simply listing them first? 

Thanks,

Wassalam.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum sister

I'm studying for exams so it will be a while before I get the sources, however I would rather list them as I go so we can discuss their stances (that way I can buy a little time to access the books and get all the names). I know quite a few off the top of my head but I'd rather make sure 100% before pasting something incorrect.

I'll probably start with Sayid Al-Khoei (ra) since I have family who studied under his guidance.

But even above and beyond all the names, what I would rather do (after we finish this if you would like) is to discuss this topic without invoking names (Khumayni (ra), Shirazi (ra), Khoei (ra), etc...) that should limit the amount of emotions involved in the dicussion on all sides. How about it?

Fi Aman Allah

Your bro Shiaboy

Edited by Shiaboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam Alaykum.

Take your time.

But even above and beyond all the names, what I would rather do (after we finish this if you would like) is to discuss this topic without invoking names (Khumayni ra.gif, Shirazi ra.gif, Khoei ra.gif, etc...) that should limit the amount of emotions involved in the dicussion on all sides. How about it?

As of now, I'm not sure where this discussion will lead on to. For now I'm interested in finding out who the scholars of the time were, as well as their stance on wilaya mutlaqa. InshaAllah the discussion will prove to be fruitful and informative.

Good luck on exams,

Wassalam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

If he was the most learned scholar of his time, it does not matter even if he was alone (which I am sure he was not). People like Aytullah Rouhullah Khomeini (qas) are born once in generations. He did what no one has done in hundreds of years. He transformed theory into practice and showed the world that the Islamic system is workable even today.

hazaron saal nargis apni be nuri pe rute hay,

bari mushkil se hota ha chaman me deda war paida.

We may have to wait another thousand years for someone like him to do something as graet.

You may want to read hadith from Masoomeen (as) in Behar al-Anwar regaring the man from Qom named after Hazrat Isa (as).

WS

Edited by Orion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam) brother Orion,

You may want to read hadith from Masoomeen  (as)  in Behar al-Anwar regaring the man from Qom named after Hazrat Isa  (as) .

Could you cut and paste the hadith or present a link?

Wasalaam

Hur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Could you cut and paste the hadith or present a link?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

This is the best I could do.

Imam Musa ibne Jaffar (as) said:

A man from my progeny will come out of Qom and lead a revolt. His name will be that of Isa. There will rally to him people resembling pieces of iron, not to be shaken by violent winds, unsparing and relying upon God.

(Behar al-Anwar)

WS

==========

logo-star.gif

imam-024.jpg

Edited by Orion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

This is what I have read before:

I'm interested in finding out who the scholars of the time were, as well as their stance on wilaya mutlaqa

The argument for wilayat al-faqih asserts that, during the ghaybah of our Beloved Imam al-Mahdi (as) , the faqih completely inherits the authority of the Hidden Imam (as) . He becomes the wali al-amr, meaning that he has full authority over selves, and that he must be obeyed the same as the Imam (as) would be.

The supporters of wilayat al-faqih attempt to make it seem like this is something that was ordered by Imam al-Mahdi (as) , i.e., that our Imam (as) ordered us to establish the government of a fallible faqih during the ghaybah, and that we will have to obey that faqih the same as we would obey the Imam (as) .

This, however, is a complete falsehood. Now, all advanced students in hauza are required to study the book Al-Makasib, by Allamah Ansari. Allamah Ansari is one of the msot important of the usuli 'ulama, and he is really the father of modern usul al-fiqh. The usuli 'uluma refer to him as Ash-Shaykh al-'Azam, the Most Glorious Shaykh. All students must study his Al-Makasib before proceeding to the final level of Dars al-Kharij, where students actually do ijtihad themselves. Several years in dars al-kharij is what makes on an official mujtahid.

In his book, which was written about 150 years ago, he studies the concept of wilayat al-faqih. His teacher, Mulla Naraqi, believed that the fallible faqih was to be obeyed the same as the Infallible Imam (as) . No other faqih had ever said such a thing, and no faqih ever said such a thing eve again until seyed Khomeini. Naraqi uses the same hadeeths that seyed Khomeini uses in order to justify his belief that the faqih must be obeyed just as the Imam is to obeyed. Allamah Ansari surveyed all these same hadeeths, and this was his famous conclusion:

As far as the meaning of wilayat by the first meaning we have discussed, meaning the wilayat where one has complete and independent authority in other people's affairs, then this wilayat is not confirmed in a general way. The only basis for this is what some people have imagined based upon certain hadeeths that talk about the affairs of the 'ulama, such as: "The 'ulama are the inheritors of the Prophets," and so forth. However, an examination of the context of these narrations gives one total certainty that these hadeeths are only explaining the job of the 'ulama with regards to Islamic laws, not that they have the same wilayat over people's selves and property as the Prophet or the Imam. As such, if a faqih comes and seeks the zakat or the khums from a person, then there is no evidence that it would be wajib upon the believer to give the zakat and khums to that faqih...As such, any attempt to provide evidence that one must obey the faqih as one must obey the Imam is completely impossible.

Al-Makasib, Chapter on Wilayat.

Now, these are the words of one of the most important usuli 'ulama, so important he is known as The Most Glorious Shaykh, and all advanced level hauza students in Qum must study his book. Here, however, he is saying that it is absolutely impossible to try and prove that the faqih is like the Imam (as) and that he must be obeyed. In spite of this, the seminary still continues the tradition of studying the book Al-Makasib, even though the author sets himself the task of destroying all of the arguments and beliefs that seyed Khomeini would repeat a 100 years later!

The fact is that no Shi'a 'alim ever argued for wilayat al-faqih before Naraqi, and nobody did after him until seyed Khomeini. The argument of Allamah Ansari given up was accepted by all Shi'a 'ulama (of whatever stripe, usuli, akhbari, etc.), because any Shi'a with the most basic level of knowledge in his religion understands that absolute obedience is owed only to an Infallible. Allah (swt) sent Islam to liberate us from the enslavement of human beings to other human beings, and to this end Imam 'Ali (as) said:

Allah did not send the Prophet (s) to humanity except liberate them from the servitude of one man to another.

For this reason Allah (swt) appointed Infallible Imams (as) . Obedience to the Imam (as) is not really obedience to a human being, for the Imam (as) himself is always obeying Allah (swt), and he makes no mistakes either intentional or unintentional. Obeying him is, in reality, obeying God. But obeying a fallible human being is not like that. If one is required to obey a fallible human being, then one will be required to follow all of the mistakes he makes. Through Imamate, Allah (swt) liberates human beings from the dictatorships they have had to suffer from throughout the centuries, by ensuring that no one will have complete authority over another except the completely Infallible, in short, that no human will have to bow to anybody other than God.

The wilayat al-faqih argument turns all of this on its head, in order to create a dictatorship that destroys the Shi'a faith in their Imam. It is patently absurd, and we see that the "Most Glorious Shaykh" Allamah Ansari has completely rejected it as foolish. This is because it is not from Shi'ism to believe that Allah (swt) would require us to obey those who may be disobeying Him. For centuries we have argued with Sunnis that the verse of authorty (ayat al-amr):

Obey Allah, and obey the Prophet and the holders of authority from amongst you

indicates upon the infallibiltiy of the Prophet (pbuh) and the holders of authority. If the Prophet (pbuh) and the holders of authority were not infallible, then inevitably they will make mistakes and perhaps even do haram, in which case Allah (swt) would be ordering us to disobey Him, which is illogical. For centuries this has been one of the most basic arguments of Shi'a Islam, yet since the creation of the wilayat al-faqih doctrine all of this has been turned on its head. Now Wahabbis are saying to the Shi'a: "If you Shi'as believe that the Imam of the Muslims must be infallible, then why is it you follow Khomeini? And if a fallible person like seyed Khomeini suffices to lead the Muslims and he must be obeyed, then why could not a fallible person have taken over after the death of the Prophet (pbuh) )? Why this whole system of Imamate? In short, then, what was wrong with Abu Bakr, since you people believe it is perfectly fine for a fallible, non-God appointed person to lead the Muslims?" The Wahabbis at answer.org have asked this question, and the wilayat al-faqih supporters cannot make a response to this argument without abandoning their faith in wilayat al-faqih.

Never has the wilayat of Imam al-Mahdi (as) come under as much threat in these years, where a whole class of "Shi'as" are saying that we no longer need an infallible Imam (as) , all we need is a fallible mujtahid. And then they have the audacity to pray for his immenent reappearance . Why? According to the wilayat al-faqih doctrine, we don't need him.

Of course this is a lie. Our Imam (as) is our Imam whether in ghaybah or not, and no will replace him. The lie of the wilayat al-faqih doctrine is laid bear by the hadeeth of Imam ar-Rida where he says:

No one replaces the Imam, and no one is like him...Can any possibly stand in his place?

Ma'ani al-Akhbar, Shaykh as-Saduq. pp. 98-99

When our Imam (as) has spoken, it is sufficient to destroy the speculation and confusion of those who claim to take his place.

Here are some more hadeeths about who the uliya al-amr are:

Imam ‘Ali (as) said: “Indeed, Allah the Glorified and Exalted has made it obligatory to obey the Prophet and the Ulia al-Amr [the holders of authority], BECAUSE THEY ARE INFALLIBLE AND PURIFIED and do not order people to disobedience."

'Alal ash-Shari', vol. 1, p. 150

Jabir ibn Yazid al-Ju’fi asked Imam al-Baqir  : ‘What reason to people always need the Prophet and Imams?’

To which he said: “In order to sustain the universe in its proper way. This is because Allah the Glorified and Exalted has lifted the punishment up from the people of the Earth so long as there is a Prophet or Imam amongst them. And so Allah the Glorified and Exalted has said: ‘Allah will not punish a people while you are amongst them.’ And the Prophet (s) said: ‘The stars are the safeguard for the people of the heavens, and my Ahl al-Bayt are the safeguard for the people of the Earth. If the stars were to leave, the people of the heavens would have to face that which they would hate. And if my Ahl al-Bayt  were to leave the Earth, the people of the Earth would have to face that which they hate.’”

Imam al-Baqir  then explained: ‘He meant by ‘My Ahl al-Bayt’ the Imams which Allah has ordered the people to obey. And so Allah has: ‘Obey Allah and obey the Prophet and the Ulial Amr [holders of authority] from amongst you.’ AND THEY ARE THE INFALLIBLE PURIFED ONES WHO DO NOT SIN AND DO NOT DISOBEY GOD.

“They are the ones assisted, supported, and guided by God. Through them, Allah sustains his servant, and through them the lands are settled, and through them the rain comes from the sky, and through them the blessings pour forth from the Earth. Through them, the people of disobedience are given respite, and the punishment and torment is not hastened towards them. The Holy Spirit does not separate from them, nor do they separate from him. The Qur’an does not separate from them, nor do they separate from them. Blessings of Allah be upon them.”

'Alal ash-Shara'i, p. 150

WaSalaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

This is the best I could do.

Imam Musa ibne Jaffar (as) said:

A man from my progeny will come out of Qom and lead a revolt. His name will be that of Isa. There will rally to him people resembling pieces of iron, not to be shaken by violent winds, unsparing and relying upon God.

You have not provided the reference to the hadeeth other than it being in bihar, which has become a convenient tactic considering that behar is 110 volumes.

While the hadeeth you produced is present in Behar, it has been spiced up a little with 'His name will be that of Isa'

Below is the correct hadeeth, void of additions and subtractions:

عن علي بن عيسى عن أيوب بن يحيى الجندل عن أبي الحسن الأول ع قال رجل من أهل قم يدعو الناس إلى الحق يجتمع معه قوم كزبر الحديد لا تزلهم الرياح العواصف و لا يملون من الحرب و لا يجبنون و على الله يتوكلون وَ الْعاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ

and the Isa that has anything to do with hadeeths about Qum can be found in this hadeeth:

و عنه عن سعد بن عبد الله عن أحمد بن محمد عن موسى بن طلحة عن أبي محمد أخي يونس بن يعقوب عنه قال كنت بالمدينة فاستقبلني جعفر بن محمد ع في بعض أزقتها فقال يا يونس فإن بالباب رجل منا أهل البيت قال فجئت إلى الباب فإذا عيسى بن عبد الله القمي جالس على الباب قال فقلت له من أنت فقال أنا رجل من أهل قم قال فلم يكن بأسرع إذ أقبل أبو عبد الله ع على حمار فدخل على الحمار الدار ثم التفت إلينا فقال ادخلا ثم قال يا يونس أحسبك أنكرت قولي لك أن عيسى بن عبد الله منا أهل البيت قال قلت إي و الله جعلت فداك لأن عيسى بن عبد الله رجل من أهل قم قال يا يونس بن يعقوب عيسى بن عبد الله منا حيا و هو منا ميتا

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

There are some basic flows to your arguments.

First you say that "wilayat al-faqih" is something that only Naraqi and Ayatullah Khomeini (qas) believed in........ The fact of the matter is that most of the Mujtahids believe in "wilayat al-faqih". (e.g. Read the reply regarding "wilayat al-faqih" from the office of Grand Ayatullah Sistani, which has been posted several times on this board). There could be different versions of VF system, but as I have said it is a confirmed Shia belief.

Second, you give the impression that the authority of a scholar is same as that of an Masoom Imam (as). My understanding is that the authority of a Faqih is limited to certain matters related to the administration or protection of the Islamic state or batterment of the Muslims........This is a very logical authority since in any state someone has to have authority may it be a Faqih or a President or Prime Minister or a dictator.

Third, we have examples of Fuqha before Imam Khomeini (qas) exersising this authority......... For example Mirza Shirazi banned tobacco in the interest of the Muslims.

Forth, you ask, what was wrong with Abu Bakr. Abu Bakr became Khalifa disobaying the Prophet (pbuh) , he became the Khalifa in presence of the Imam (as) and opressed the Ahlul Bait (as)....... Need to know more.

Fifth you say, The supporters of wilayat al-faqih attempt to make it seem like this is something that was ordered by Imam al-Mahdi , i.e., that our Imam ordered us to establish the government of a fallible faqih during the ghaybah..... So I ask you, Shia should not establish a government and let Sunnis rule over us?, or let secular politions establish a government based on British law?, or better let foreighners invade and rule over us?......Naturally during the occultation of the Imam (as) authority (leadership, rulership) should remain in the hands of pious fuqha who could guide the Ummah and if possible establish Quranic laws untill Imam (as) comes.

Sixth, you say, a whole class of "Shi'as" are saying that we no longer need an infallible Imam (as) . Can you tell me where is this class of Shias? How come we have never seen them?......AstaghfarAllah.

WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

You have not provided the reference to the hadeeth other than it being in bihar, which has become a convenient tactic considering that behar is 110 volumes.

There is no tactic. I had said "This is the best I could do." since I did not have the full ref.

عن علي بن عيسى عن أيوب بن يحيى الجندل عن أبي الحسن الأول ع قال رجل من أهل قم يدعو الناس إلى الحق يجتمع معه قوم كزبر الحديد لا تزلهم الرياح العواصف و لا يملون من الحرب و لا يجبنون و على الله يتوكلون وَ الْعاقِبَةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ

Thank you for peoviding the arabic. Now could you also provide the full reference?

WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fifth you say, The supporters of wilayat al-faqih attempt to make it seem like this is something that was ordered by Imam al-Mahdi  , i.e., that our Imam  ordered us to establish the government of a fallible faqih during the ghaybah..... So I ask you, Shia should not establish a government and let Sunnis rule over us?, or let secular politions establish a government based on British law?, or better let foreighners invade and rule over us?......Naturally during the occultation of the Imam (as) authority (leadership, rulership) should remain in the hands of pious fuqha who could guide the Ummah and if possible establish Quranic laws untill Imam (as) comes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can any one besides the Imam do that? How can you guarentee that until the return of Imam (ajt) no injust person will occupy the seat Sayyid Khamenei does now? Or that a just person will become injust? If children of Abbas (ra) can turn against the Ahlul Bayt (as) then any fallible human being may be blinded by the 'seat'. As for keeping Islamic laws in place...that can be done without occupying the highest government office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I knwo this is a bit off topic, but yesterday on CBC, there was a whole documentary on prostitution in Iran, unfortunately, i missed it, but, at this point, can we still call it an Islamic State? I understand that prostitution is found almost everywhere now a day, but isnt an Islamic state supposed to be free of those sorts of things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can any one besides the Imam do that? How can you guarentee that until the return of Imam (ajt) no injust person will occupy the seat Sayyid Khamenei does now? Or that a just person will become injust? If children of Abbas (ra) can turn against the Ahlul Bayt (as) then any fallible human being may be blinded by the 'seat'. As for keeping Islamic laws in place...that can be done without occupying the highest government office.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

First of all where did the Imam (as) say, I am leaving you and from now on all Quranic laws are frozen, on hold till I return?

Second, holding government office is not the issue. Having final authority is. Personally, I dont care who holds the governmet office as long as he obays the Faqih, as long as the faqih has the final authority, as long as government runs under the guidance of a Mujtahid.

WS

Edited by Orion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I knwo this is a bit off topic, but yesterday on CBC, there was a whole documentary on prostitution in Iran, unfortunately, i missed it, but, at this point, can we still call it an Islamic State? I understand that prostitution is found almost everywhere now a day, but isnt an Islamic state supposed to be free of those sorts of things?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

I ask you, was there no crime during the period of Prophet (pbuh) or that of Imam Ali (as) ?

So if there was crime and people received punishments during the Islamic State under the Masoomeen (as) how can we expect Islamic State under the non-Masoom to be crime free?

WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

There is no tactic. I had said "This is the best I could do." since I did not have the full ref.

Thank you for peoviding the arabic. Now could you also provide the full reference?

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

salaam

Behar al-Anwar V57 P216 Chapter - Al-mamdouh min al-Bilaad wal mathmoum)

and the 'tactic' comment was not directed at you, but at those who innovate in the hadeeths. We dont need to be innovating and tweaking hadeeths to drive home points or to justify political stance.

BTW - I'm still open to proof that it does exist. so if someone has the exact reference please do provide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

While the hadeeth you produced is present in Behar, it has been spiced up a little with 'His name will be that of Isa'

Sister Wilayah,

Before accusing people of spicing up hadeeths, the hadeeth Brother Orion does exist with "His name is that of Isa (Ibn Maryam)" :)

I am not sure if it's in Bihar alAnwaar, but i know it's in Mizaan alHikmah and will do my best inshAllah to provide full refrence :)

Regards,

Kumail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Sister Wilayah,

Before accusing people of spicing up hadeeths, the hadeeth Brother Orion does exist with "His name is that of Isa (Ibn Maryam)" :)

I am not sure if it's in Bihar alAnwaar, but i know it's in Mizaan alHikmah and will do my best inshAllah to provide full refrence :)

Regards,

Kumail

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

salaam

Mizan Al-hikma - Mohammad Al-Raishahri. volume 1 Page 356 Hadeeth #2231

الأمام الكاظم: رجل من اهل قم يدعو الناس الى الحق. يجتمع معه قوم كزبر الحديد لا تزلهم الرياح العواصف ولا يملون من الحرب ولا يجبنون وعلى الله يتوكلون والعاقبة للمتقين

(original reference provided in the book)

(4-7)البحار:60/213/22 وج 23 وص 216/37 وج38

Now that you have claimed with certitude that it exists, provide the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

This is what I have read before:

The argument for wilayat al-faqih asserts that, during the ghaybah of our Beloved Imam al-Mahdi  (as) , the faqih completely inherits the authority of the Hidden Imam (as)   . He becomes the wali al-amr, meaning that he has full authority over selves, and that he must be obeyed the same as the Imam   (as) would be.

The supporters of wilayat al-faqih attempt to make it seem like this is something that was ordered by Imam al-Mahdi  (as)  , i.e., that our Imam  (as)  ordered us to establish the government of a fallible faqih during the ghaybah, and that we will have to obey that faqih the same as we would obey the Imam (as)   .

This, however, is a complete falsehood. Now, all advanced students in hauza are required to study the book Al-Makasib, by Allamah Ansari. Allamah Ansari is one of the msot important of the usuli 'ulama, and he is really the father of modern usul al-fiqh. The usuli 'uluma refer to him as Ash-Shaykh al-'Azam, the Most Glorious Shaykh. All students must study his Al-Makasib before proceeding to the final level of Dars al-Kharij, where students actually do ijtihad themselves. Several years in dars al-kharij is what makes on an official mujtahid.

In his book, which was written about 150 years ago, he studies the concept of wilayat al-faqih. His teacher, Mulla Naraqi, believed that the fallible faqih was to be obeyed the same as the Infallible Imam  (as)  . No other faqih had ever said such a thing, and no faqih ever said such a thing eve again until seyed Khomeini. Naraqi uses the same hadeeths that seyed Khomeini uses  in order to justify his belief that the faqih must be obeyed just as the Imam  is to obeyed. Allamah Ansari surveyed all these same hadeeths, and this was his famous conclusion:

As far as the meaning of wilayat by the first meaning we have discussed, meaning the wilayat where one has complete and independent authority in other people's affairs, then this wilayat is not confirmed in a general way. The only basis for this is what some people have imagined based upon certain hadeeths that talk about the affairs of the 'ulama, such as: "The 'ulama are the inheritors of the Prophets," and so forth. However, an examination of the context of these narrations gives one total certainty that these hadeeths are only explaining the job of the 'ulama with regards to Islamic laws, not that they have the same wilayat over people's selves and property as the Prophet or the Imam. As such, if a faqih comes and seeks the zakat or the khums from a person, then there is no evidence that it would be wajib upon the believer to give the zakat and khums to that faqih...As such, any attempt to provide evidence that one must obey the faqih as one must obey the Imam is completely impossible.

Al-Makasib, Chapter on Wilayat.

Now, these are the words of one of the most important usuli 'ulama, so important he is known as The Most Glorious Shaykh, and all advanced level hauza students in Qum must study his book. Here, however, he is saying that it is absolutely impossible to try and prove that the faqih is like the Imam (as)   and that he must be obeyed. In spite of this, the seminary still continues the tradition of studying the book Al-Makasib, even though the author sets himself the task of destroying all of the arguments and beliefs that seyed Khomeini would repeat a 100 years later!

The fact is that no Shi'a 'alim ever argued for wilayat al-faqih before Naraqi, and nobody did after him until seyed Khomeini. The argument of Allamah Ansari given up was accepted by all Shi'a 'ulama (of whatever stripe, usuli, akhbari, etc.), because any Shi'a with the most basic level of knowledge in his religion understands that absolute obedience is owed only to an Infallible.  Allah (swt) sent Islam to liberate us from the enslavement of human beings to other human beings, and to this end Imam 'Ali  (as)  said:

Allah did not send the Prophet (s) to humanity except liberate them from the servitude of one man to another.

For this reason Allah (swt) appointed Infallible Imams   (as) . Obedience to the Imam  (as)  is not really obedience to a human being, for the Imam (as)   himself is always obeying Allah (swt), and he makes no mistakes either intentional or unintentional. Obeying him is, in reality, obeying God. But obeying a fallible human being is not like that. If one is required to obey a fallible human being, then one will be required to follow all of the mistakes he makes. Through Imamate, Allah (swt) liberates human beings from the dictatorships they have had to suffer from throughout the centuries, by ensuring that no one will have complete authority over another except the completely Infallible, in short, that no human will have to bow to anybody other than God.

The wilayat al-faqih argument turns all of this on its head, in order to create a dictatorship that destroys the Shi'a faith in their Imam. It is patently absurd, and we see that the "Most Glorious Shaykh" Allamah Ansari has completely rejected it as foolish. This is because it is not from Shi'ism to believe that Allah (swt) would require us to obey those who may be disobeying Him. For centuries we have argued with Sunnis that the verse of authorty (ayat al-amr):

Obey Allah, and obey the Prophet and the holders of authority from amongst you

indicates upon the infallibiltiy of the Prophet  (pbuh)  and the holders of authority. If the Prophet  (pbuh)  and the holders of authority were not infallible, then inevitably they will make mistakes and perhaps even do haram, in which case Allah (swt) would be ordering us to disobey Him, which is illogical. For centuries this has been one of the most basic arguments of Shi'a Islam, yet since the creation of the wilayat al-faqih doctrine all of this has been turned on its head. Now Wahabbis are saying to the Shi'a: "If you Shi'as believe that the Imam of the Muslims must be infallible, then why is it you follow Khomeini? And if a fallible person like seyed Khomeini suffices to lead the Muslims and he must be obeyed, then why could not a fallible person have taken over after the death of the Prophet (pbuh) )? Why this whole system of Imamate? In short, then, what was wrong with Abu Bakr, since you people believe it is perfectly fine for a fallible, non-God appointed person to lead the Muslims?" The Wahabbis at answer.org have asked this question, and the wilayat al-faqih supporters cannot make a response to this argument without abandoning their faith in wilayat al-faqih.

Never has the wilayat of Imam al-Mahdi  (as)  come under as much threat in these years, where a whole class of "Shi'as" are saying that we no longer need an infallible Imam (as)   , all we need is a fallible mujtahid. And then they have the audacity to pray for his immenent reappearance  . Why? According to the wilayat al-faqih doctrine, we don't need him.

Of course this is a lie. Our Imam  (as)  is our Imam whether in ghaybah or not, and no will replace him. The lie of the wilayat al-faqih doctrine is laid bear by the hadeeth of Imam ar-Rida  where he says:

No one replaces the Imam, and no one is like him...Can any possibly stand in his place?

Ma'ani al-Akhbar, Shaykh as-Saduq. pp. 98-99

When our Imam  (as)  has spoken, it is sufficient to destroy the speculation and confusion of those who claim to take his place.

Here are some more hadeeths about who the uliya al-amr are:

Imam ‘Ali  (as)  said: “Indeed, Allah the Glorified and Exalted has made it obligatory to obey the Prophet and the Ulia al-Amr [the holders of authority], BECAUSE THEY ARE INFALLIBLE AND PURIFIED and do not order people to disobedience."

'Alal ash-Shari', vol. 1, p. 150

'Alal ash-Shara'i, p. 150

WaSalaam

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Ahsantum bro. Actually this comes as a huge surprise to me because what I had read of Naraqi was that he didn't go to this extent. Anyhow, Ayatollah Jawad Amuli wrote a book dispersing himself from those who give it the authority of the Imam (ajtf). I'll get the title when I get the book.

Since when is Imam Khumayni the afqa? With due respect, there were Marajis at his time who had been there for decades and who had millions of followers the likes of Sayid Gulpaygani who had what is known as "Al Sham Al Fuqhi" who refused Mutlaqa.

Sister Faithmuslima, I'll bring forth Sayid Al-Khoei's stance first and we will go from there. Hopefully the bros won't get out of hand [for a change :)]

Fi Aman Allah

PS: all ra's ommitted to meet the board requirements.

Your bro Shiaboy

Edited by Shiaboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam) brother Orion and sister Wilayah, thank you for providing the hadith. Sister Wilayah, can I ask you to provide a translation of the Arabic?

Wasalaam

Hur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam) brother Orion and sister Wilayah, thank you for providing the hadith. Sister Wilayah, can I ask you to provide a translation of the Arabic?

Wasalaam

Hur

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The translation is that which bro Orion provided minus the addition of his name being the same as that of Isa bin Maryam (as), which does not exist in the Arabic text.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

First of all where did the Imam (as) say, I am leaving you and from now on all Quranic laws are frozen, on hold till I return?

Second, holding government office is not the issue. Having final authority is. Personally, I dont care who holds the governmet office as long as he obays the Faqih, as long as the faqih has the final authority, as long as government runs under the guidance of a Mujtahid.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Orion why are you always on the defensive? What I meant to say, and if you read my post correctly, it is not possible to have a 100% crime free society, but to get to the point where they make TV shows about it, then it is a noticeable problem. How come Saudi Arabia has been succesful in having less, or less visible problems such as the above mentioned than Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

it is not possible to have a 100% crime free society,.

Exactly.

but to get to the point where they make TV shows about it, then it is a noticeable problem

This is because their focus is to defame Iran and find reasons to do it. There is perhaps more crimes, drugs, prostitution, car snatchings, roberies, etc in Pakistan (for example) but you hardly see coverage because Pakistan is not in their focus. It may be in their good books (at this point).

How come Saudi Arabia has been succesful in having less, or less visible problems such as the above mentioned than Iran?

There is crime in Saudi Arabia too. For example I hear from my friends living there how much alcohol they drink. But you are not going to hear much about that since Saudi Arabia is in their good books. Also for them drinking is not a crime.

WS

Edited by Orion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Exactly.

This is because their focus is to defame Iran and find reasons to do it.

There is crime in Saudi Arabia too. For example I hear from my friends living there how much alcohol they drink. But you are not going to hear much about that since Saudi Arabia is in their good books. Also for them drinking is not a crime.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

I agree with you bro. However at the same time, we have to admit that Iran does need reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with you bro. However at the same time, we have to admit that Iran does need reform.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

Sure, Iran is not perfect. Their should always be reform and improvement.

WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Sure, Iran is not perfect. Their should always be reform and improvement.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum

Just one precision about Saudi (to be fair), as far as I know and as far as my friends who are from there and my father who visited a few times, they all say that Alcohol is only served in the Foreign Compounds? It's the first time I hear that they have alcohol as not being a crime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just one precision about Saudi (to be fair), as far as I know and as far as my friends who are from there and my father who visited a few times, they all say that Alcohol is only served in the Foreign Compounds? It's the first time I hear that they have alcohol as not being a crime?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

(salam)

I think you misunderstood me. Alcohol is a crime but western media does not consider it a crime. I was talking about western media.

WS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

Exactly.

This is because their focus is to defame Iran and find reasons to do it. There is perhaps more crimes, drugs, prostitution, car snatchings, roberies, etc in Pakistan (for example) but you hardly see coverage because Pakistan is not in their focus. It may be in their good books (at this point).

There is crime in Saudi Arabia too. For example I hear from my friends living there how much alcohol they drink. But you are not going to hear much about that since Saudi Arabia is in their good books. Also for them drinking is not a crime.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Just by the reply I can see that you have not watched CBC before. I have lived here all my life, for the better part of it I remember CBC as being one of the fairest TV stations around, their main objective (unlike CNN and the likes) isn't to defame any foreign country but to show different aspects of them. I do remember them having a whole documentary on Saudi Arabia... and trust me, it was not good advertisement of the Government, at the same time, it is the same TV station that aired several shows showing the cruelty of the Jews in the occupied lands of Palestine, and the many conspiracies of the Canadian government.

What good would they get to "defame" Iran if they do it to every single country where there is corruption and as you say, need of reform?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

(salam)

I think you misunderstood me. Alcohol is a crime but western media does not consider it a crime. I was talking about western media.

WS

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Assalam Alaikum bro

My lack of sleep is finally kicking in. Thanks for the wake up call :)

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...