kimanumanu wrote: ↑
Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:33 pm
What's your take on it?
Here is the paper for reference:
Yes, this is a good paper and very relevant to the issue at hand. I had read it before, and I thought I had responded to it at that time. However, I see now I did not.
Basically, as I mentioned before, the question of succession is fraught with difficulties. In principle, the nass of an Imam (and in his absence, of the da'i al-mutlaq) is final and absolute. See the footnote 17 in the paper. The case of Imam Jafar's nass on Imam Ismaili is of a different sort: that was a question of a designated successor who pre-deceased his father. According to Ismailis, once Imam Jafar appointed Imam Ismaili, the latter was free to appoint his own successor, which he did. Hence, on the passing away of Imam Ismail, even though Imam Jafar was still alive, Imam Muhammad bin Ismail became the imam. Sometimes, in the theory of nass and imamat, this principle is stated as "Imammat does not flow backwards".
Note that as Walker mentions, the very fact of performing nass is a validation of an Imam. Hence, an Imam can not pass away without designating a successor. (BTW: This does not mean, as Ahmed Ali Raj in a lecture implied, that an imam can't die if he has not appointed a successor. It simply means that appointing a successor is the single most important task for an imam, and hence he takes care of it as soon as feasible). In the absence of the imam, the same holds for a da'i al-mutlaq. (Again: Ahmed Ali Raj says that there is no need for this principle for da'i al-mutlaq. I strongly disagree. The position of the da'i al-mutlaq in the time of satr is on par with the imam, except in some theoretical ways. Hence, what applies to an imam, applies to a da'i al-mutlaq in satr).
The case of Imam Qa'im's appointment of his son, versus the indication by Imam Mu'izz to Ustad Jawdhar that he intended his son Abdallah succeed him, is also interesting, and relevant. (And escaped the notice of Walker, apparently) In the former case, Imam Qa'im, his son (al-Mansur) already knew of his father's designation, while in the latter case, Abdallah did not know and in fact was surprised at the actions of Jawdhar. According to SKQ, SMB himself told him directly that he was doing nass on him. Hence, in this case, the nass is properly designated as the successor himself was informed, even though there were no other witnesses. Given that SKQ was the mazoon for 50 years, there is no reason to doubt his word, and, in fact, his word should be sufficient.
As I mentioned in my post above, however, the case of Imam Hakim is more mysterious. He appointed his cousin as "wali 'ahd" that i.e the one who was owed allegiance from Muslims due to his designation as the successor. Even coins were minted in Abd al-Rahim's name. Again, Imam Hakim designated another cousin as his successor. However, at the disappearance of Imam Hakim, Imam al-Zahir become the imam, despite these earlier designations. This case does not figure in the da'i case, as likely both parties agree that the actions of Imam Hakim were ruse and perhaps misunderstood by some of his followers.
The most interesting, and relevant case is of Imam Mustansir, that we discussed above. As Walker right mentions, one challenge Imam Mustansir has was that he lived very long. Note that this is the exact challenge which SMB had: he lived so long that his sons become too powerful and took over the seat of the da'i, reducing him only to a puppet to their whims. Eventually, these same sons staged a coup against SMB and his designated successor, i.e. SKQ.
The situation of having so many sons, some of whom no doubt wanted to be the next imam, caused a lot of chaos and confusion. That only two serious contenders arose (Nizar and Mustali) is rather surprising! Walker's description of the confusion is excellent, and no need to repeat it here. However, it is not clear from that description that nass was done on Nizar. In fact, even if Nizar was appointed as "wali 'ahd al mumineen" it is meaningless, as Imam Hakim had used that term for his cousin, without adverse consequences to the succession of his son. Hence, after the death of Imam Mustansir, three (not one!) of his other sons refused to accept Imam Mustali as Imam, as they thought they were themselves were appointed.
Some careful analysis of this incident makes it clear that even though Nizar claimed the imamat for himself, there is little clarity in the historical record of this. The use of titles was already made useless by Imam Hakim, and so simply having been called by some title can't be taken as a proper designation. Hence, the final death-bed designation of Imam Mustansir, which al-Afdal was witness to (presumably along with Imam Mustali himself) must be given the most weight.
Actually, this whole incidence proves that Dawedar Mr. Muffy Saifuddin (DMMS) is in the wrong, and has strayed very far from the core principles of his own dawaat in his lust for power and wealth. If he claims that Imam Mustansir did a proper designation on Nizar then he must accept that the whole edifice of Mustali dawaat (and after that the Tayebbi dawaat) is false.
Let us look at the following logical statements:
Axiom: Imam is infallible, and can not make a mistake
Proposition: A properly appointed successor via nass can't be changed
Proof: As the Imam is infallible, his initial proper designation (nass) can't be incorrect. Hence, any claims that he changed his mind later are false.
Corollary: If we accept Imam Mustali as the imam, then, it follows, Imam Mustansir can not have made another nass.
Hence, if Muffy claims that nass was done on Nizar, then he must accept that all he has believed in, going back 1000 years is false and he, hence, should immediately submit himself to the Aga Khan and become a Nizari Ismaili.
Clearly, Muffy, in his lust for power and wealth, has left the path of piety and become a liar and denier of his own doctrines. Sad that Bohris still follow him. Of course, as we all very well know, Bohris in their jamaan filled stupor are unable to hold a thought long enough to reflect on this, or for that matter, any other thing, besides the next jamaan and news about "mola". Pathetic, really.