Usool-a-Kafi declares Molana Ismail (a) is rightful Imam

If you have questions or want to share knowledge about Dawoodi Bohra religions and rituals please post them here. Any discussion outside the framework of Dawoodi Bohra beliefs and tradition is not allowed. This forum is primarily for sharing of information and knowledge.
badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

Usool-a-Kafi declares Molana Ismail (a) is rightful Imam

#1

Unread post by badrijanab » Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:02 pm

Reference - Kulayni, Kafi, I, p.318: "Ja`far explained that the Imamate is bequeathed from father to son, but not necessarily to the eldest son, for "as Daniel selected Solomon from among his progeny," so an Imam designates as his successor the son he considers really worthy of the office. Thus Ja`far could annul the appointment of his eldest son Isma'il, who died before him, pass over the candidature of his next son, Abd Allah, and nominate the third, Musa al-Kazim."


Ithna Asheri's officially agrees that Ab-initio Imam Sadiq a.s. has designated Imam Ismail a.s. as his successor (next Imam).

The unanimously agreed dogma by all Shia's: Imam cannot make mistake.

So Imam Sadik at first place cannot make mistake in choosing the next Imam. Hence proved as per Usool-a-Kaafi: Imam Ismail a.s. is the only rightful Imam and not Janab Musa Kazim.



ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

#2

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:04 pm

Ismail (a.s.) was a pious and respected person with impeccable character and was one of the leading torch bearers of Islam. However one doesn't have to take recourse to some books which are blasphemous and untrustworthy to justify his greatness. A few quotes from the subject book are enough to prove that its contents are unislamic, distorted and far from truth :-

None of the Prophets (a.s) had been bestowed with the Prophet Hood until He declared His belief in the fallacy character of ALLAH. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#1, Pg#265 - Published Iran]

Disclaimer to the doctrines that fate, benediction and vice belong to ALLAH. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#1, Pg#293 - Published Iran]

Adam (a.s) became Infidel due to His jealousy. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#3, Pg#428 - Published Iran]

Ali (r.a) possesses same rights as were kept by Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w). [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#1, Pg#380 - Published Iran]

Without knowing the Imam, God cannot be proved. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#1, Pg#331 - Published Iran]

Imam knows the time of his death and dies by his own will. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#2, Pg#23 - Published Iran]

Imam has greater qualities than the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.w). [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#2, Pg#299-300 - Published Iran]

Taqiyyah (concealing the facts) is the true religion. [Usool-ul-Kaafi, Vol#3, Pg#332 - Published Iran]

“The Imams possess all the knowledge granted to the angels, prophets, and messengers.” (Al-Kulaini, Al-Kafi, p.255)

“Signs of the prophets are possessed by the Imams.” (Al-Kafi, p.231)

The Shiite authentic works also permits homosexuality and sodomy: "(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Muhammad bin Yahya, from Talha bin Zaid, from Abu Abdullah [as] said: The Messenger of Allah [pbuh] said: Whoever voluntarily let others sexually molest him, Allah will invest him with women's lust." [al-Kafi (fil Furoo') al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Who Let Others Sexually Molest Him, vol.5, p.549, narration 1.]

"(Narrated) Ali bin Ibraaheem from his father from al-Nufaly from As-Sukoony from (Imam) Abu Abdallah [as] said: Amierul-Mu'mineen (Ali) [as] said: (al-Luwaat ma doon ad-dubur, wad-dubur huwal-kufr) Sodomy is in (anything) other than dubur (anal sex), for dubur [has multi meanings] is actually the Kufr (disbelief)". The commentator on al-Kafi wrote: "It is possible to understand (from the statement) that Sodomizing (a man) is permissible" (Al-Kafi (fil Furoo'): Book of Marriage: Chapter of Sodomy, narration 3, vol.5, p.544

"(Narrated) Muhammad bin Yahya , from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Ali bin al-Hakam said: I heard Safwaan bin Yahya saying: I said to (Imam) al-Rida : a man among your followers requested me to ask you about a matter, which he feared and embarrassed to ask you (directly). He said: What is it? I said: For the man to use the woman's anus. He said: He may. I said: Do you personally do that? He said: We do not do that." (Al-Kafi (fil Furoo'): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Women's anuses, vol.5, p.540, narration 2).

"Narrated Muhammad, from Ahmad bin Muhammad, from Ali bin al-Hakam, from Abdul-Rahman al-'Azramy, from Abu Abdullah [as] said: Amirul-Mu'mineen (Ali) [as] said: There are servant (men) of Allah who carry in their loins uteruses like those of women. (Abu Abdullah) Said: He was asked: Then Why they don't get pregnant? He (Ali) said: Because it is (placed) upside down. They also have glands in their anuses like that of the camel, if erupted they erupt with it, and if it cooled down, they cool down with it." al-Kafi (fil Furoo'): al-Kulainy, Book of Nikaah, Chapter: Who Let Others Sexually Molest Him, vol.5, p.549, narration 3.



badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

#3

Unread post by badrijanab » Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:41 pm

GM bhai, I agree with you like Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim this book 'Usul-a-Kafi' is also not trustworthy. But what to do your jaatwala believe former books to be true and Ithna Asheri believe latter book to be true. That's why I've to use Ithna Asheri own trustworthy book Usul-a-Kafi to show that Syyedna Imam Ismail a.s. is the only rightful successor of Molana Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s.

Learn about your faith from your own book of Bukhari: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8512



ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

#4

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Tue Oct 01, 2013 4:04 pm

badrijanab bhai,

I can understand your predicament because your claims have fallen flat on your face hence you try to use diversionary tactics. BTW it is people like you who are filled with loads of venom and who believe in "Jaatwalas" and are ones responsible for the hatred and divide prevalent in the Ummah. You do not have even a proper consensus amongst people of your own faith which leads to further division of Ummah. As regards myself, please do not worry about me and stop taxing your brains because I believe in Islam alone as the adjectives like Sunnis, Shias, Dawoodi bohras, youth bohras, pristine bohras etc etc mean nothing to me.

You may quote Bukhari, Muslim, Daim ul Islam or any damn book to justify your claims and use them for your convenience and the next moment you drop them like hot bricks. Hence it results in utter confusion which leads to unnatural and hallucinating behaviour which you display quite often. Whereas I accept their quotes ONLY if they are in line with Quranic principles and not according to what any tom, dick and harry say.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#5

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu Nov 28, 2013 2:18 am

Assalamu 'alaikum jamee'an

Brother Badri Janaab, do you have the arabic for the particular reference you have mentioned? Volume 1, page 318, what hadith number exactly?

If you think such a hadith is at vol 1, page 318, it seems you are mistaken, unless you meant vol 1, page 31, h. 8, but it's not at pg31 either.



AMAFHH
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:19 am

#6

Unread post by AMAFHH » Thu Nov 28, 2013 5:03 am

wa alaikum as salam



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#7

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Fri Nov 29, 2013 4:59 am

Mind you, there are tons of textual evidences for the explicit nass (designation) of Imam Al-Kadhim [as], would Imam As-Sadiq [as] really leave the Shi'a in all this confusion?

Surely, the straight path is only one path, not a dozen paths. We can go on all day 'refuting' each other, sunnis/bohras/shias/nizaris/zaydis etc. Anyone can 'refute', but this doesn't necessarily mean that the one doing the refuting is correct. no not at all. The sirat al-mustaqeem is a clear and easy one, not a confusing one. I would like to ask all bohra brethren (being an ex-bohra my self), who is the current Imam of your time? Do you know who he is? Your role & responsibilities in his absence?

Many bohras have found their way back to the original Imami path by the grace of Allah (swt) and I pray many more will follow. May he guide us all towards the straight path and forgive our shortcomings.



badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

#8

Unread post by badrijanab » Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:50 am

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:Assalamu 'alaikum jamee'an

Brother Badri Janaab, do you have the arabic for the particular reference you have mentioned? Volume 1, page 318, what hadith number exactly?

If you think such a hadith is at vol 1, page 318, it seems you are mistaken, unless you meant vol 1, page 31, h. 8, but it's not at pg31 either.
Walekum afzal salam

Above is fully correct reference.

Ithna Asheri Marja/Ayatullah got frightened from the truth revelation that their own books besides all Sunni historians are proving that Imam Sadiq a.s. made nuss over Imam Ismail a.s. so they deleted those reference hence from past fifty years all the editions published of Osool-a-Kafi will not have said traditions. Should you refer editions printed before 50 years you will get it on the page and details above.

The proof of what I wrote above: Refer book published by Mr. S.H.M. Jafri title, "The Origins and Early Development of Shi`a Islam" this book is recognised by the Government of Iran and also available over your Shia Chat .com - in it go to chapter 11 (Chapter name: The doctrine of Imamat), refer page 251 (page number could differ with PDF or Word file) - but that paragraph is tagged with # [15] to give details of source. You can see that SHM Jafri too have referred Osool-a-Kafi same page and said that Imam Sadik made nuss over Imam Ismail a.s.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#9

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Tue Dec 17, 2013 8:06 pm

badrijanab wrote: Walekum afzal salam

Above is fully correct reference.

Ithna Asheri Marja/Ayatullah got frightened from the truth revelation that their own books besides all Sunni historians are proving that Imam Sadiq a.s. made nuss over Imam Ismail a.s. so they deleted those reference hence from past fifty years all the editions published of Osool-a-Kafi will not have said traditions. Should you refer editions printed before 50 years you will get it on the page and details above.

The proof of what I wrote above: Refer book published by Mr. S.H.M. Jafri title, "The Origins and Early Development of Shi`a Islam" this book is recognised by the Government of Iran and also available over your Shia Chat .com - in it go to chapter 11 (Chapter name: The doctrine of Imamat), refer page 251 (page number could differ with PDF or Word file) - but that paragraph is tagged with # [15] to give details of source. You can see that SHM Jafri too have referred Osool-a-Kafi same page and said that Imam Sadik made nuss over Imam Ismail a.s.
Please give the proper text with its reference, number, arabic (If possible) and not your own interpretation of the hadith.

Regarding the work 'The Origins and Early Development of Shi'a Islam' I cannot seem to find it in here either. Please find it for me if you can kindly do so. Here is the link:

http://www.al-islam.org/the-origins-and ... yid-jafari

Anyways I have some quick questions if you can answer them as you failed to reply back to me in the messages we sent via the PM. Don't worry I'll make it easy for you:

1. As you don't know who your Imam is now, how do you fulfill the necessity of knowing the Imam of ones time lest one dies the death of Jahilliyah (According to prophetic traditions)?

2. Show a single hadith that testifies that Imam As-Sadiq [as] had performed the nass on Ismail.

3. According to you, Abdullahi Mahdi was the 1st Imam after the period of concealment (Satr). If he truly was the 'Mahdi' then why didn't he establish his rule over the earth? Why didn't 'Isa [as] descend?

4. How about the about-face (one of many) where the da`wa had originally claimed that Muhammad b. Isma`il was the Qa'im in ghayba, to then claiming that it was all a ruse, and that in fact one of the da`i is himself was the Imam, splitting the movement in two between those upholding the original doctrine, and those following the new?

5. Why if Qadi Nu`man had access to an infallible imam, why then did he have to rely on Imami and Zaydi collections of hadiths to compile Da`aim al-Islam, and why no hadiths in that past Imam Sadiq (as)?


The book 'Aaimmatut tahireen, page 265, it is mentioned that this 'Imam' is the same one regarding whom the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) have issued the tradition that our Mahdi shall reappear in a time, approximately in 300 A.H. and shall spread Islamic power all over the world and he would fill the earth with justice, equity, peace and security. This Mahdibillah was kept in a prison in Sijilmasa, a village of Africa. Then his Dai, Abi Abdillah got him freed and made him reappear and established his power. After that in a few days an event occured in which this beloved Dai was killed under suspicious circumstances and Imam Mahdi Billah performed his last rites and declared him a martyr.

On page 268 of this book it is mentioned that a new sect came into being and after reappearance the period of fear and calamities again commenced. The oppression and injustice of Dajjal (anti-Christ) also began. This 'Imam Mahd'i Billah had never led the congregation prayer in the Holy Ka’ba and neither did he even pray over there. And neither did His Eminence, Isa (a.s.) descend from the fourth heaven to the earth. All this clearly shows that this Mahdi Billah is not the one about whom the traditions of the Infallibles (a.s.) speak. Dajjal was also not killed during his tenure. Rather he remained alive even during the tenure of the 12th and 13th Imams. Mahdi Billah also was not able to exercise authority over the whole world. So much so, that even some of his Dais were against him; and some of them were even put to death. These and many other contradictory things are present in that book.

According to this book, the news of the death of some of the Imams was concealed from the people for sometime. But no reason is offered for the same. The only justification mentioned therein is that it was due to hidden wisdom that the information was withheld from the people. In the end the only thing understood from all this is that after the reappearance of Mahdi Billah the whole world did not come under his power and this has continued to our present time. The Fatimid Kingdom and Caliphate came to an end during the time of the 21st 'Imam' Al-Tayyab and again he had to go into occultation.

May Allah guide us all to his way.

I write this with the hope that you will think and read around properly; not just follow with that which you were born with. I found it hard initially to revert to the Imami Ithna 'Ashari sect, but by the grace and blessings of Allah (swt), he showed me the guidance in my heart.

Our religion is a simple one but it is non-infallible beings who have done so much to infiltrate and twist the true Islamic 'aqeedah, we must refer to those whom Allah (Swt) and his messenger (saww) appointed for they are our true guides.



badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

#10

Unread post by badrijanab » Tue Dec 24, 2013 11:53 am

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote: Please give the proper text with its reference, number, arabic (If possible) and not your own interpretation of the hadith.
This thread begins with details you inquired above, so re-refer first paragraph of this thread. Unlike Ithna's, I don't believe in giving personal interpretation or forging of Hadith. For Arabic text refer to version which is at least 50-60 years old because after realising that Ithna Asheri own books are claiming that Imam Sadik a.s. made (first) nuss on Imam Ismail a.s. your leaders have omitted those traditions in later printing of all those books.
Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote: Regarding the work 'The Origins and Early Development of Shi'a Islam' I cannot seem to find it in here either. Please find it for me if you can kindly do so. Here is the link:
http://www.al-islam.org/the-origins-and ... yid-jafari'
Yes, I will be kind to you to find the text - in the above link - go to chapter number 11 and refer to the paragraph number 13 and line number 7 (= 2nd last line of same para). So this proves that your own core fundamental book i.e. Osool-a-Kafi is acknowledging that Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s. made (first) nuss on Imam Ismail and not on Hz. Musa Kazim.

1. As you don't know who your Imam is now, how do you fulfill the necessity of knowing the Imam of ones time lest one dies the death of Jahilliyah (According to prophetic traditions)?
A) Does Ithna Asheri's have photo or "huliya" of their alleged 12th Imam to know & recognise who he is, assuming if he is? No. So Ithna's are unable to recognise and know their Imam hence all Ithna Asheri of past approx 1200 years died in Jahaliyat.
B) Any sect of Islam including Ithna Asheri doesn't know all the names of all 124,000 prophets does that make any one less Muslim? No.
C) Knowing names or Kuniyat or laqab are not criterion of Imaan. The criterion of Imaan is love for the office of Imam.
D) What is interesting is that at first many Ithna Asheri referred to Hasan al-Askari’s mysterious son by the name “Ali” as opposed to “Muhammad”. However, they later decided to switch to “Muhammad” so that it would more fully apply to Sunni's collection of Hadith which state that Muhammad is the name of Imam Mehdi. We read: "They thought that he (the eleventh Imam) had left a successor whose name was not Muhammad but Ali. They said that al-Askari had no son except Ali, who had been seen by his father’s trustworthy followers." (Source: The Occultation of the Twelfth Imam: A Historical Background, by Dr. Jassim M. Hussain, p.63 - this author is Ithna Asheri).
E) Fatimi Dawat recognise and affiliate themselves with the office of Imam and recognise/refer to Imam of time as "Imam uz zaman" - on death of Mumineen Panjatan will came to receive soul of Mumin and they will introduce mumin to Imam of their time. Where else all Ithna Asheri of past 1200 years; as discussed above will die as death of jahilliyat.
2. Show a single hadith that testifies that Imam As-Sadiq [as] had performed the nass on Ismail.
Osool-a-Kafi example was given above likewise Bakir Majlisi in Bihar ul Anwaar has acknowledged the (first) nuss by Imam Sadik a.s. over Imam Ismail a.s. than Hz. Musa Kazim (Refer book Wazkur fil kitaab Ismail, available in the library section of this website). Others who have quoted same (=Imam Sadik made nuss on Imam Ismail and not Musa Kazim):
1. Makrezi in 'Itihazul Hanfa'.
2. Shahristani.
3. Abu Anoof in 'Umdatut Talib'.
4. Sayyed Mustafa Ghalib in 'Al Harkatul Batiniya fil Islam'.
5. Khawaja Ataullah in 'Tareekhul Jahan kushai'.
6. Mohammed Quasim in 'Tareekh Farishta'
7. Mohammed Ameen in 'Tareekhul Alween'.
8. Baqir Majlisi in 'Bihar ul Anwaar'.
9. Syyed Sajjad Hussain in 'Akhlaq a Mohammed'.

3. According to you, Abdullahi Mahdi was the 1st Imam after the period of concealment (Satr). If he truly was the 'Mahdi' then why didn't he establish his rule over the earth? Why didn't 'Isa [as] descend?
Wrong. The names are similar but he is not that Imam Quaim or Mehdi who will come at Qayamat.
4. How about the about-face (one of many) where the da`wa had originally claimed that Muhammad b. Isma`il was the Qa'im in ghayba, to then claiming that it was all a ruse, and that in fact one of the da`i is himself was the Imam, splitting the movement in two between those upholding the original doctrine, and those following the new?
Wrong. Imam Mohammed Shaikr a.s. bin Imam Ismail a.s. bin Imam Jaffer Sadiq a.s. has neve claimed to be Imam Qa'im in ghayba.
5. Why if Qadi Nu`man had access to an infallible imam, why then did he have to rely on Imami and Zaydi collections of hadiths to compile Da`aim al-Islam, and why no hadiths in that past Imam Sadiq (as)?
A) Only Ali knows about what Mohammed told to Ali but general public do not knows same. However, Ali knows all what Mohammed told to people in general. Imam-a-awwal Hasan a.s. inherited knowledge of Mola Ali a.s. and from him Imam Hussain a.s. …. Imam Ismail a.s. inherited same knowledge from Imam Jaffer Sadiq a.s., ….. and so on till Imam Moiz a.s. who inherited the knowledge of Mola Ali a.s.
B) All traditions in Daimul Ismal are vetted and approved by Imam Moiz a.s. (the Masoom and inheritor of knowledge of Mola Ali a.s.) hence we do not require chain (Isnad) of narrators. And that is the reason there are no Isnad's in Daimul Islam.
C) Ithna Asheri has sourced their Hadith from common public which is subjected to errors - 200 years after Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w. his hadith passed through at least eight generations and travelled through thousands of mouth - the original hadith is borne to be corrupted. Hence, all hadith that Ithna Asheri and Sunni have in their books are begged from general public which cannot be verified as true or correct. Hence practices of Ithna Asheri and Sunni's based on those Hadith is subject to severe corruption and human error. Moreover remember: only those hadith of Prophet's are with Ithna Asheri and Sunni (in corrupted version) that Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w. told to public in general. But they do not have all those hadith that Mohammed s.a.w.w. told to Mola Ali a.s. in private. Only Fatimi Imam who inherited knowledge from Mola Ali as. have access to them. So only Fatimi Dawat have original, true and comprehensive hadith of Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w.

The book 'Aaimmatut tahireen, page 265, it is mentioned that this 'Imam' is the same one regarding whom the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) and Imam Ja’far Sadiq (a.s.) have issued the tradition that our Mahdi shall reappear in a time, approximately in 300 A.H. and shall spread Islamic power all over the world and he would fill the earth with justice, equity, peace and security. This Mahdibillah was kept in a prison in Sijilmasa, a village of Africa. Then his Dai, Abi Abdillah got him freed and made him reappear and established his power. After that in a few days an event occured in which this beloved Dai was killed under suspicious circumstances and Imam Mahdi Billah performed his last rites and declared him a martyr.
This hadith of Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w. is one of the proof that Ismaili chain is the rightful chain of Imamat. Prophet prophesied, "300 years after us sun will rise in 'Magrib', and Islamic sultanate will establish." Like Ashab-a-Kahaf raised after 300 years same way from Prophet till Imam Abdullah Mehdi the period of exact 300 years passed and Islam sultanate was established (filled with justice, equity, peach and security). This hadith of Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w. falsify Ithna Asheri's chain of Imamat.
On page 268 of this book it is mentioned that a new sect came into being and after reappearance the period of fear and calamities again commenced. The oppression and injustice of Dajjal (anti-Christ) also began. This 'Imam Mahd'i Billah had never led the congregation prayer in the Holy Ka’ba and neither did he even pray over there. And neither did His Eminence, Isa (a.s.) descend from the fourth heaven to the earth. All this clearly shows that this Mahdi Billah is not the one about whom the traditions of the Infallibles (a.s.) speak. Dajjal was also not killed during his tenure. Rather he remained alive even during the tenure of the 12th and 13th Imams. Mahdi Billah also was not able to exercise authority over the whole world. So much so, that even some of his Dais were against him; and some of them were even put to death. These and many other contradictory things are present in that book.

According to this book, the news of the death of some of the Imams was concealed from the people for sometime. But no reason is offered for the same. The only justification mentioned therein is that it was due to hidden wisdom that the information was withheld from the people. In the end the only thing understood from all this is that after the reappearance of Mahdi Billah the whole world did not come under his power and this has continued to our present time.
In the light of all I wrote above, last para proves to be wrong and forged inference by Ithna Asheri's.

The Fatimid Kingdom and Caliphate came to an end during the time of the 21st 'Imam' Al-Tayyab and again he had to go into occultation.
Wrong. When Imam Tayyeb a.s. went into concealment the state of Yemen was under the kingdom of Fatimid. Hence, concealment of Fatimi Imam was by choice where else "ghayab" of alleged 12th Imam of Ithna Asheri was his "majboori" as he do not have any sultanate.

May Allah guide us all to his way.

I write this with the hope that you will think and read around properly; not just follow with that which you were born with. I found it easy convincing Fatimi Dawat = only true Islam. By the grace and blessings of Allah (swt), he showed me the guidance in my heart.

Our religion is a simple one but it is non-infallible beings who have done so much to infiltrate and twist the true Islamic 'aqeedah, we must refer to those whom Allah (Swt) and his messenger (saww) appointed for they are our true guides.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#11

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Wed May 06, 2015 1:56 pm

Lool..you still haven't answered my main question properly. Give us the original Arabic hadeeth along with the chain of narrators. You haven't done that nor answered my other questions satisfactorily.

So badrijanab...let me ask again:

Who is the Imam al zaman of the bohras? What are his qualities & descriptions? What if I want to read more on his position & his life to understand him? Where can I access this information?

Are there specific narrations from the Prophet or his ahlulbayt speaking about the coming of the fatimi imam & that at-tayyeb will go inoccultation?

We have clear traditions stating the coming of 12 successors and their names found in both the books of sunnis & shias. Do the bohras or agha khanis have narrations which speak about the coming of 21, 49 or 100 successors?

Which bohra sect is the correct one & who is the rightful dai/representative of your Imam?



JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

#12

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Wed May 06, 2015 5:51 pm

Brother Al Khadim
So badrijanab...let me ask again:

Who is the Imam al zaman of the bohras? What are his qualities & descriptions? What if I want to read more on his position & his life to understand him? Where can I access this information? I'll leave this to Bdrijanab because you asked of him.

Are there specific narrations from the Prophet or his ahlulbayt speaking about the coming of the fatimi imam & that at-tayyeb will go inoccultation? At Ghadir E Khoum it was declared Imam will follow Nabuwat. It did not state how many Imams, etc. Your contention that the Prophetic tradition dictates there will be 12 leaders and according to Sunni sources, these 12 leaders names are different from yours. 2. Some time back your people used to claim that the 12 princes declared from the progeny of Ishmael in the Bible was reference to your Imams. So you have a connection with 12 somehow. Wherever you see 12 you think it is reference to your Imams.

We have clear traditions stating the coming of 12 successors and their names found in both the books of sunnis & shias.
Please read above.
Do the bohras or agha khanis have narrations which speak about the coming of 21, 49 or 100 successors?

I cannot speak for the Bohoras, but please do not drag Ismailis into your debate. I respect all beliefs but when you point a finger at me I reserve the right to correct it.

I'll only speak for the ismailis.




At the event of the Ghadir E Khoum it was declared, according to the Shia belief and I am speaking according to Shia belief, which includes, Bohoras, yourselves and us, that Nabuwat will be followed by Imamat to guide the Ummah. We, Ismaili believe that Imamat will continue till the end of times. No number has been mentioned. I can guarantee you, 49 will definitely be followed by 50 if the world does not come to an end, before then because Ismailis believe that their spiritual father will not run away and hide to save his own skin. He will die with them or go in hiding (satr) for a few years to save his Ummat like the Imams did during the period of Imam Ismail, but they were in contact with the community through their Dais.. This is the Ismaili belief.
Which bohra sect is the correct one & who is the rightful dai/representative of your Imam?
Will leave this to brother Badrijanab.



JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

#13

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Wed May 06, 2015 6:30 pm

Brother Khadim, Please read below from one of your own. I have more should you wish.
I. Proof #1
We have discussed the exalted status of Imamah in previous chapters, and the proofs for the Imamah of Ali ibn Abi Talib.
While the Shi’a unanimously agree upon the need for the Imam, with time they have entered into confusion and disagreement about who it is that embodies this Divine Nur.
The two largest claimants to this illustrious position are the Nizari Qasim-Shahi Ismailis and the Twelver Shi’ites. The former group finds this nur within the face of Imam Shah Karim Agha Khan IV, and believe him to be the living and manifest embodiment of this light.
The latter group believes that Allah’s Supreme Proof is embodied in the form of Muhammad ibn Hasan al-Mahdi. He is believed to be the last in a line of Twelve Imams foretold by the Prophet and his family, but has existed in a state of Occultation for the past thousand years.
The split between these two sects originates in the death of Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq’s, whose luminous teachings on Imamah have been extensively quoted .
The Ismailis believe that Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq announced that his eldest son, Isma’il, would succeed him as Imam.
They argue that Imam Ja’far sought to protect his beloved son from the oppression of the ‘Abbasid authorities, and so staged a funeral for his son, effectively “faking” his death; Imam Isma’il went into a state of hiding (though there are a number of reports of him being witnessed after his alleged death, which will be discussed below), and was eventually succeeded by his son Muhammad.
It was from this lineage that the illustrious Fatimid Empire derives itself, and whose line of Imams continues today.
Mainstream Twelver Shi’as, who reject the idea that Imam Mahdi, his peace be upon us, has proof during the Occultation in the form of the Ismaili Imams, argue that Isma’il died in his father’s lifetime, and so could not have been his successor.
In this chapter, we will attempt to analyze and critique the proofs which the mainstream Twelver Shi’as offer against the Imamah of Isma’il son of Ja’far.
We will find that these proofs are highly contradictory in nature; while the mainstream Twelvers all agree that Imam Ja’far was succeeded by Imam Musa al-Kazim, they cannot agree as to whether or not Isma’il had originally been appointed as the Imam, whether or not this appointment was later withdrawn (by Imam Ja’far or by God Himself), or even whether or not Isma’il was a person of sound character and piety or a wicked sinner.
Our argument is that the historical record bears witness to the nass (Divine designation) of Imam Isma’il, that he was the most pious and most beloved of Imam Ja’far’s son, and that it was impossible for this nass to be withdrawn in anyway.
The great body of historical evidence establishes the great love and devotion which Imam Ja’far had for his eldest son, Isma’il, and that the Shi’as of the time were of the widespread belief that Isma’il would be the Imam after his father.
A survey of all the historical sources indicates one astounding fact: that with the exception of the mainstream Twelvers, all commentators have reported that the nass (designation) for Imamah was originally given to Isma’il.
As for the Twelver sources themselves, they are explicit that Isma’il was the most beloved son of Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq, and that his followers believed that Imam Isma’il would be the Imam after him.
This, at the minimum, is what the historical sources confirm. The Twelver hadith encyclopedia of Bihar al-Anwar, as well as ancient Twelver historical study Kitab al-Irshad, we read:

كان لابي عبدالله عشرة أولاد…وكان إسماعيل أكبر إخوته، وكان أبوعبدالله شديدا المحبة له، والبربه والاشفاق عليه وكان قوم من الشيعة يظنون أنه القائم بعد أبيه، والخليفة له من بعده، إذ كان أكبر أخوته سنا، ولميل أبيه إليه، وإكرامه له، فمات في حياة أبيه.

Abu ‘Abdillah [as-Sadiq] had ten children…Isma’il was the eldest of them. Abu ‘Abdillah had intense love, affection, and devotion for him, and the people believed that he would be the Rectifier [al-qa’im] after him, and that he would be his successor. This was because he was the eldest of the brothers, as well as his father’s intense inclination towards, and the great nobility which his father bestowed upon him. He died in the lifetime of his father. (Majlisi Bihar Al-Anwar 47:246, Al-Mufid Kitab al-Irshad 431).
Other non-Twelver sources confirm this set of facts. The Sunni heresiographer Ibn ‘Utbah (who was no friend of the Shi’as, Twelver or Ismaili) says:

أمّا إسماعيل بن جعفر الصادق - - ويكنى أبا محمد، وأُمّه فاطمة بنت الحسين الاَثرم بن الحسن بن علي بن أبي طالب - ويعرف بإسماعيل الاَعرج، وكان أكبر ولد أبيه، وأحبَّهم إليه، كان يحبُه حباً شديداً، وتوفي في حياة أبيه.
As far as Isma’il ibn Ja’far as-Sadiq, he was given the patronym of Abu Muhammad, and his mother was Fatimah bint Al-Husayn al-Athram bin al-Hasan bin Ali ibn Abi Talib, and was known as Al-‘Araj.
He was the eldest son of his father, and the most beloved by him; his father loved him intensely. He died during his father’s lifetime. (Subhani Buhuth 72).
Another Sunni heresiographer, Ash-Shahristani, writes:
These [the Ismailis] hold that Isma’il was the designated Imam after Ja’far, as the sons of Ja’far also agreed.
They differ among themselves, however, as to whether or not he died during the lifetime of his father. Some of them say that he did not die, but that his father had declared that he had died to save him from the ‘Abbassid caliphs; and that he had held a funeral assembly to which Mansur’s governor in Medina was made a witness.
Some, on the other hand, say that he really did die. Designation, however, cannot be withdrawn, and has the advantage that the Imamah remains in the descendants of the person designation, to the exclusion of others (Ash-Shahristani Muslim Sects 144).
As such, we find that the non-Twelver sources are in agreement upon the Imamah of Isma’il, and that the Twelver themselves acknowledge the high position that Isma’il held with his father.
It is clear from the historical record that the followers of Imam Ja’far believed that Isma’il would succeed him in the office of Imamah.
Regardless of whether or not Isma’il died during the lifetime of his father , the fact that he was their heir apparent is confirmed.
The Twelver narrations that speak of his alleged death during the lifetime of his father are, in fact, explicit on this; while that body of narrations is always presented by mainstream Twelvers as proof of Imam Musa’s Imamah, they unintentionally prove that most Shi’as believed in the Imamah of Isma’il as well. In the Twelver literature
It is not surprising, then, that objective academic researchers have come to the same conclusion as the Ismailis:
Divine nass was originally given to Imam Isma’il. Ivanow writes:
According to the overwhelming majority of the available sources, both sectarian and of their opponents, Imam Jafar appointed as his successor his eldest son Ismail, by his first wife, a highly aristocratic lady, great grand-daughter of Hasan.
It is clear from these narrations that the Shi’a community was well-aware of the intense devotion that Imam Ja’far had towards his eldest son, and there was widespread belief that Isma’il would succeed his father as Imam.
In addition, there is an important doctrinal “hiccup” in the hadith discussed : we see that the community believed that the grandson of Imam Ja’far was going to be the Qa’im, the one who would rise by the sword and redress the wrongs that had been committed against the family of the Prophet. But it is the common Twelver belief that the “Rectifier” [al-qa’im] is the Twelfth Imam, not the Seventh Imam.
In fact, there are many rectifiers, of which the supreme one is the Twelfth, but which the seventh was as well. This narration, found within Twelver books, indicates that this belief must have been a later development amongst the Shi’as.
What these evidences establish, then, is that the Shi’a community believed that Imam Isma’il would succeed Imam as-Sadiq.
This, in and of itself, is a proof that the nass of Imam Ja’far was given to his son Isma’il. Logically, we would have to ask: from whence did they derive this false belief?
Furthermore, Imam Ja’far must have known that his Shi’as were harboring a false belief, a belief that could lead them into terrible misguidance in the future.
Why, then, did he not emphasize to them that though he loved Isma’il dearly, that Allah had ordained Imam Musa as the heir apparent?
Mainstream Twelvers cannot argue that Imam as-Sadiq did not know; their hadith literature is explicit that every Imam knows with absolute certainty who will inherit the nur after him:
الإمام يعرف الإمام الذي من بعده فيوصي إليه.
Imam as-Sadiq said: “The Imam knows the one who will be the Imam after him, and so he passes his inheritance on to him.” (Al-Kulayni Al-Kafi 1:277)
As such, Imam Ja’far must have known what was to come after his death; and if he allowed his followers to be deluded into believing Isma’il was to be his successor, then he most certainly would have failed as guide, teacher, and defender of the faith.
This is a matter of the utmost importance. In addition to explicitly acknowledging the wide-spread Shi’a belief in the Imamah of Isma’il, the narration also implies that the Imam Musa’s Imamah did not become manifest to the Shi’as until much later.
All of the Twelver narrations in this regard are emphatic that the followers of Imam Ja’far genuinely believed that Isma’il would be the next Imam.
How could such a belief have come into being? Did it spring from nowhere?
Was it merely based upon the fact that Isma’il was the eldest brother? Why would Imam Ja’far have kept his followers in misguidance about such an important issue for so long?
Why build up false expectations, expectations that would inevitably lead to conflict?
Could he not have simply said: “Isma’il is not the Imam after me,” and left the matter in no doubt?
There is also a great deal of evidence that scholars who are pillars of the exoteric Twelver tradition were perplexed after Imam as-Sadiq’s death.
One of them was Zurarah, who narrates more hadith in Twelver books than any other scholar, and is a pillar of their juristic tradition. We read in the Twelver rijal book of Al-Kashshi:

لما كانت وفاة أبي عبد الله قال الناس بعبد الله بن جعفر و اختلفوا فقال قائل به و قال قائل بأبي الحسن فدعا زرارة إبنه عبيداً فقال يا بنى الناس مختلفون في هذا الأمر فمن قال بعبد الله فإنما ذهب إلى الخبر الذي جاء ان الإمامة في الكبير من ولد الإمام فشد راحلتك و امض إلى المدينة حتى تأتينى بصحة الأمر. و أعتل زرارة فلما حضرته الوفاة سأل عن عبيد فقيل له لم يقدم قدعا بالمصحف فقال اللهم إني مصدق بما جاء نبيك محمد فيما أنزلته عليه و بينته لنا على لسانه و إني مصدق بما أنزلته علي في هذا الجامع و إن عقدي و ديني الذي يأتيني به عبيداً ابنى و ما بينته في كتابك فإن أمتنى قبل هذا فهذا شهادتي على نفسي و إقراري بما يأتي به عبيداً إبني و انت الشهيد علي بذلك بمات زرارة و قدم عبيد فقصدناه لنسلم عليه فسألوه عن الأمر الذي قدصه فأخربهم ان أبا الحسن صاحبهم.
After Abu ‘Abdillah died, some of the people believed that the Imamah had passed to ‘Abd Allah the son of Ja’far, and they disagreed. And others said that it had passed to Abu Al-Hasan [Imam Musa], and so Zurarah called for his son ‘Ubayd, and said: “O my son, the people are disagreeing about this affair. Those who are supporting ‘Abd Allah are basing themselves on the report that says that Imamah goes to the eldest son of the Imam. Get your riding camel and go to Madinah until you can bring me the truth about this affair.” Zurarah eventually became very ill, and when death approached he asked about ‘Ubayd. It was said to him: ‘He has not come.’ And so Zurarah called for a Qur’an, and said: ‘O Allah, indeed I bear witness to what has come with Your prophet Muhammad and what You have revealed to him and made clear to us through his tongue, and I bear witness to what You have sent down in this Book. Indeed, my covenant and my religion is what my son ‘Ubayd will bring, and what You have explained in Your Book. If you will end my life before he comes, then this is my testimony and confession upon my own self concerning what ‘Ubayd, my son, will say. And You are my witness for that.’ And so Zurarah died. After this, ‘Ubayd came, and so we went out to greet him. They asked him about the affair which he had set out to discover, and so he told them that their Lord (sahib) is Abu al-Hasan [Imam Musa]. (Al-Kashshi Rijal 154).
When death began to approach Zurarah, it is narrated that he took the Qur’an and said to his aunt:

أشهدي ان ليس لي إمام غير هذا الكتاب
Bear witness for me that I have no other Imam except this Book (Al-Kashshi Rijal 156).
This narration indicates that there was no clear nass upon Imam Musa. If there had been a clear proclamation of Imam Musa’s Imamah, why would someone of such exalted status as Zurarah have been so confused about it?
Would he have not just said: “I have heard Imam as-Sadiq’s nass on Imam Musa, as for these other people, they are in misguidance and confusion.”
Yet clearly did not know; so if Zurarah did not hear this clear designation for Imam Musa, who did?
Shaykh as-Saduq, for his part, seems to confirm the veracity of these reports. He writes:

أما زرارة بن أعين فإنه مات قبل إنصراف من كان وفده ليعرف الخبر و لم يكن سمع بالنص على موسى بن جعفر من حيث قطع عذره فوضع المصحف الذي هو القرآن على صدره و قال اللهم إني أئتم بمن يثبت هذا المصحف إمامته و هل يفعل الفقيه المتدين عند إختلاف الأمر عليه إلا ما فعله زرارة؟

As for Zurara, he died before the departure of the one he sent out to gather information for him. He had not heard the nass on Imam Musa ibn Ja’far in such a manner that would leave him without any excuses, so he placed the book (which was the Qur’an) upon his breast and said: ‘O Allah, I follow the one whose Imamah is confirmed by this book.’
Would a religious scholar, faced with a confusing situation, do anything different than what was done by Zurarah? (As-Saduq Kamal 75).
As such, it seems that one of the most important scholars of the Twelver tradition, Shaykh as-Saduq, accepted these reports as true.
His attempt to justify Zurarah’s actions also indicates that he believed Zurarah genuinely did not know who the Imam was after Imam as-Sadiq; otherwise, he would not feel the need to praise Zurarah for doing what he did when “faced with a confusing situation.”
After making this defense, Shaykh as-Saduq then goes on to undercut himself completely, by offering the possibility that Zurarah was merely doing taqiyyah.
One is left to ask: if Zurarah had been doing taqiyyah, then why did Shaykh as-Saduq feel compelled to defend Zurarah’s death-bed confusion?
Once again, we see as-Saduq offering contradictory evidences to support the same position.
Apparently, he thought that this was an effective way of arguing, but it clearly is not; the mainstream Twelvers should be able to get their story on this issue straight, rather than just throwing around all sorts of random and mutually exclusive evidences to support their position.
As can be expected, as-Saduq goes on to quote a hadith which supports this contention, whose authenticity is highly dubious given Shaykh as-Saduq’s own acknowledgment of Zurarah’s genuine confusion about the successor of Imam as-Sadiq.
In the narration which as-Saduq cites, someone asks Ali ar-Rida if Zurarah died without knowing the right of Imam Musa al-Kazim.
Ali ar-Rida replies that that yes, Zurarah indeed knew the right of Imam Musa al-Kazim; when he dispatched his son ‘Ubayd to Medinah (see above), he did not to find out who the Imam was (which he already knew), but rather to find out whether it was permissible to break taqiyyah and announce the Imamah of Imam Musa.
The problems with this narration are manifold. First, we have seen that As-Saduq seems to accept that Zurarah was genuinely perplexed, and so the narration contradicts the contentions of the very person who is narrating it (as-Saduq).
Furthermore, one has to ask what benefit taqiyyah would have had in this situation.
Was Zurarah trying to protect himself? All these stories mention that Zurarah was on his death-bed when he made these pronouncements, and so taqiyyah would have been of little use.
Was he attempting to protect Imam Musa? But surely the ‘Abbasid authorities were well-aware of the large following Imam Musa developed after his father’s death.
Zurarah’s hesitation and confusion would not have served much in protecting Imam Musa; rather, it would have only served to undermine the legitimacy of his Imamah.
Second, the narration from Imam Ali ar-Rida clearly contradicts the actual report on the incident, cited in the Rijal of Al-Kashshi.
In that narration, ‘Ubayd does not return with a report concerning the obligation of taqiyyah, but rather came back to tell the people that Imam Musa was the Imam.
Furthermore, nowhere in the report does Zurarah tell his son to ask Imam Musa about taqiyyah; rather, he explicitly tells ‘Ubayd do find out who the Imam is.
If the mainstream Twelvers would argue that Zurarah was doing taqiyyah even with his own son, then there would have been absolutely no point in sending ‘Ubayd to Madinah: for it would be the height of irrationality to send someone to another city to gather information, without specifying what information one wants gathered.
Third, the fact that someone (allegedly) asked ar-Rida about this incident indicates that, at the minimum, the Shi’a were of the belief that Zurarah had in fact died in a state of perplexity.
One must ask where this wide-spread belief originated. If Zurarah had sent ‘Ubayd to Madinah in order to ask about the obligation of taqiyyah, then could not ‘Ubayd have simply told everybody this?
Why would he allow his father’s reputation to lie in ruins, and leave it to the next Imam after Imam Musa to clarify the issue?
We have to remember that, within mainstream Twelver Shi’ism, Zurarah is the most important hadith narrator, narrating 20,094 hadiths.
If Zurarah died without knowing the Imam of his time, this would have been scandalous. Certainly, ‘Ubayd should have put down any such discussion immediately, but it seems to have persisted for quite awhile.
Mainstream Twelver Shi’a scholars have argued that all of these negative narrations derived from enemies of Zurarah, who were jealous of his close association with the Imams.
This, once again, is a statement without any evidence, and if it were true, then such a false narration should not have been included in the rijal of Al-Kashshi.
If one attempts to argue (as mainstream Twelvers often do when they find uncomfortable things in their hadith books) that Al-Kashshi was probably just collecting all the reports available in a rijal “encyclopedia,” then one should know that the original rijal of Al-Kashshi is lost and what we have today as the Rijal al-Kashshi is actually an abridged version, edited by none other than the “Shaykh of the Nation,” Shaykh at-Tusi.
Since this is an abridged, edited, and censored version, then if these damning narrations about Zurarah are false, we would have expected Shaykh at-Tusi to have deleted them before anything else.
Yet, they remain in the edited version. This can only mean that Shaykh at-Tusi accepted their authenticity; the fact that someone supposedly asked Ali ar-Rida about this incident also indicates how well-known it was.
Fourth, Shaykh as-Saduq provides no other evidence that Zurarah had sent ‘Ubayd to enquire about taqiyyah.
He only quotes one narration, and it is obvious (perhaps even axiomatic) that a single-narration report (khabr al-wahid) such as this gives no certainty at all.
As we have seen, all the reports about the ‘Ubayd incident depict Zurarah in a state of total disarray; never once does Zurarah ask his son about taqiyyah.
The fact that this is the best evidence which Shaykh as-Saduq can come up with is a punishing indictment of the weakness of his case.
This narration from Ali ar-Rida seems to be a convenient forgery which as-Saduq has inserted in the midst of a confused and rambling discourse based on totally contradictory sets of evidences.
These narrations also bring to light another interesting fact: Zurarah bears witness to the fact that the Shi’as were of the belief that the Imamah was supposed to pass to the eldest son.
He seems, however, to have been rather confused. If Imam Isma’il had died, then it is true that ‘Abd Allah was the eldest. But Isma’il, even if he had died, was still alive during his father’s lifetime and so the Imamah should have been passed to him, and then on through his progeny.
The Imam is the bearer of Allah’s Light, and designation cannot be “withdrawn” from him; Imamah is not some political office that can be dispensed with at will, as the mainstream Twelver hadith literature bears witness:

قال ابو عبد الله: مازلت ابتهل إلى الله في إسماعيل ابني أن يحييه لي ويكون القيم من بعدي فأبى ربي ذلك و إن هذا شيء ليس إلى الجرل منا يضعه حيث يشاء إنما ذلك عهد من الله عز و جل يعهده إلى من يشاء فشاء الله أن يكون إبني موسى أبي أن يكون إسماعيل.
Imam as-Sadiq said: I have not ceased imploring Allah the Exalted about Isma’il, begging him to bring him back to life and make him the Rectifier after me, but my Lord has refused this.
This is not something that a man place wherever he wants; rather it is a covenant from Allah the Exalted and Glorified.
He will make this covenant with whomever he wills, and so Allah has willed that my son Imam Musa would be the Rectifier after me, and has refused to make Isma’il the Imam after me. (Majlisi Bihar 47:270).
As such, even mainstream Twelver believe that the Imamah cannot just be switched around.
Zurarah, however, bears witness that the Imamah, during that age, was going to be passed to the eldest son.
If this is what the Shi’as believed in the time of Imam Ja’far, then should not the Imam have made it clear that this was wrong and that Imam Ja’far’s eldest son, Isma’il, would not succeed him?
If he did, then how did Zurarah manage to not hear about it?
One might say: the Prophet gave clear nass to Imam Ali at Ghadir, but people still rejected it; could not the same thing not have happened with Imam Ja’far’s followers?
The response to this is simple. The rejection of the nass of Imam Ali was a rejection not only of Imam Ali as a person, but also of the very idea of infallible and Divinely appointed Imamah.
Abu Bakr and ‘Umar did not claim to be the Prophet’s appointed successors, nor did they claim Divinely appointed Imamah.
Rather, they claimed that the Prophet had left no successor at all, and that the community was free to choose their caliph.
This is very different from what Subhani is alleging about the Shi’as of Imam Ja’far.
If these followers of Imam Ja’far rejected the nass on the Imamah of Imam Musa, then that means they did not really believe that Imam Ja’far was a divine authority, just as the balance of historical evidence indicate that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar did not believe that the Prophet was a divine authority.
If that was the case, their belief Isma’il was the Imam after Imam as-Sadiq would be meaningless.
Are we honestly to believe that they believed Isma’il was the Imam, but Imam Ja’far wasn’t?
Is there any Ismaili who claims such a thing?
And if they rejected Imam Ja’far’s Imamah and believed that his nass was meaningless and devoid of hujjah, then why would they care who his successor would be?
It would be as silly as mainstream Twelver Shi’as arguing about who the Imam should be after Prince Aga Khan.
Do Twelver Shi’as concern themselves with identifying his successor? No, because they reject his Imamah.
So why would this group of Shi’as in Imam Ja’far’s time care who his successor would be, if they rejected Ja’far’s own Imamah?
And if they didn’t reject his Imamah, how could they have rejected his nass on Imam Musa al-Kazim?
In any case, we have seen from these texts that the early Ismailis most certainly did believe in Imamah.
Subhani says that the followers of Imam Ja’far believed that Imamah passed to the eldest son; this indicates that they believed that Imam Ja’far was the Imam, that he is the proof of God and the sole source of religious authority, and that this office of Imamah was hereditary.
As such, any comparison of the early Ismailis to Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and the other usurpers of Saqifah is a false analogy.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#14

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Wed May 06, 2015 6:42 pm

JavedhJuma wrote:Brother Al Khadim
So badrijanab...let me ask again:

Who is the Imam al zaman of the bohras? What are his qualities & descriptions? What if I want to read more on his position & his life to understand him? Where can I access this information? I'll leave this to Bdrijanab because you asked of him.

Are there specific narrations from the Prophet or his ahlulbayt speaking about the coming of the fatimi imam & that at-tayyeb will go inoccultation? At Ghadir E Khoum it was declared Imam will follow Nabuwat. It did not state how many Imams, etc. Your contention that the Prophetic tradition dictates there will be 12 leaders and according to Sunni sources, these 12 leaders names are different from yours. 2. Some time back your people used to claim that the 12 princes declared from the progeny of Ishmael in the Bible was reference to your Imams. So you have a connection with 12 somehow. Wherever you see 12 you think it is reference to your Imams.

We have clear traditions stating the coming of 12 successors and their names found in both the books of sunnis & shias.
Please read above.
Do the bohras or agha khanis have narrations which speak about the coming of 21, 49 or 100 successors?

I cannot speak for the Bohoras, but please do not drag Ismailis into your debate. I respect all beliefs but when you point a finger at me I reserve the right to correct it.

I'll only speak for the ismailis.




At the event of the Ghadir E Khoum it was declared, according to the Shia belief and I am speaking according to Shia belief, which includes, Bohoras, yourselves and us, that Nabuwat will be followed by Imamat to guide the Ummah. We, Ismaili believe that Imamat will continue till the end of times. No number has been mentioned. I can guarantee you, 49 will definitely be followed by 50 if the world does not come to an end, before then because Ismailis believe that their spiritual father will not run away and hide to save his own skin. He will die with them or go in hiding (satr) for a few years to save his Ummat like the Imams did during the period of Imam Ismail, but they were in contact with the community through their Dais.. This is the Ismaili belief.
Will leave this to brother Badrijanab.
We are not talking on the issue of ghadeer here my friend for that is another topic. My question to you..Are we allowed to reject the prophetic traditions just because they may not comply with our own viewpoint?

Let me correct you: In both Sunni & Shia Imami works (including pre-ghayba works, the concept of Twelve successors has been established from countless different sources & narrations, their names have also been mentioned.

The same cannot be said for the Ismaili 'Imams'.

My friend, your 'spritual father' agha khan 'Imam' seems to be doing a great job of guiding your community, so much so that the shariah has been abrogated which is in total contradiction with the earlier fatimid caliphs & scholars such as Qadi nu'man.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#15

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Wed May 06, 2015 6:47 pm

JavedhJuma wrote:Brother Khadim, Please read below from one of your own. I have more should you wish. (deleted the repetative post by Moderators)--------------------
We aren't interested in reading long-essays. Don't divert from the main issue in hand & take it one point at a time. Please answer my questions.

We cannot just pick & choose which narrations we like and which we don't. If the Prophet [s] says something then it becomes a Hujjah(proof) upon us to follow that. Especially when in relation to aqa'id (beliefs), the narration(s) reach a level of tawatur, then they cannot be disputed at all.

This can be applied to the Hadith of Thaqalayn & to the Hadith of the Twelve successors.

Thanks.



KA786110
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 9:20 am

#16

Unread post by KA786110 » Wed May 06, 2015 10:49 pm

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
JavedhJuma wrote:Brother Khadim, Please read below from one of your own. I have more should you wish. (deleted the repetative post by Moderators)--------------------
We aren't interested in reading long-essays. Don't divert from the main issue in hand & take it one point at a time. Please answer my questions.

We cannot just pick & choose which narrations we like and which we don't. If the Prophet [s] says something then it becomes a Hujjah(proof) upon us to follow that. Especially when in relation to aqa'id (beliefs), the narration(s) reach a level of tawatur, then they cannot be disputed at all.

This can be applied to the Hadith of Thaqalayn & to the Hadith of the Twelve successors.

Thanks.
Javed's post is relevant to the topic of the thread and provided ample historical evidence that Mowlana Imam Ismail (as) was the successor and rightful Imam after Imam Jaffar Sadiq (as)

Hadith of Thaqalayn is valid and sahih. The hadith of the twelve successors is suspect. Both cannot be valid at the same time. Hadith of Thaqalayn mentions that Qur'an and Ahle bayt Imam will remain together until the day of judgement (they reach Kawthar). But twelvers have no present living Imam.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#17

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 12:51 am

KA786110 wrote:
Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote: We aren't interested in reading long-essays. Don't divert from the main issue in hand & take it one point at a time. Please answer my questions.

We cannot just pick & choose which narrations we like and which we don't. If the Prophet [s] says something then it becomes a Hujjah(proof) upon us to follow that. Especially when in relation to aqa'id (beliefs), the narration(s) reach a level of tawatur, then they cannot be disputed at all.

This can be applied to the Hadith of Thaqalayn & to the Hadith of the Twelve successors.

Thanks.
Javed's post is relevant to the topic of the thread and provided ample historical evidence that Mowlana Imam Ismail (as) was the successor and rightful Imam after Imam Jaffar Sadiq (as)

Hadith of Thaqalayn is valid and sahih. The hadith of the twelve successors is suspect. Both cannot be valid at the same time. Hadith of Thaqalayn mentions that Qur'an and Ahle bayt Imam will remain together until the day of judgement (they reach Kawthar). But twelvers have no present living Imam.
Again take it one point at a time..is it so difficult for you? Not a siingle authentic hadeeth has been quoted to support the 'Imamate' of Ismail.

'Ample evidence' but no narrations have been mentioned. I can bring you enough clear, precise narrations on the Imamate of al-kadhim (as).

Side note: I also find it funny because the Ismailis don't have their own proper collections of ahadith & instead have to rely largely upon twelver sources.

Even the book, Daim ul Islam written by Qadi al-nu'man has an entire section on Wilayat..yet nothing dedicated to the Imams beyond as-sadiq (as).

If the ahadith regarding the twelve successors were suspect then you wouldn't so many 'sunni' ulama actually comment on the narrations (even though they technically don't believe in imamate) so much so that they try to bring up a list of their own twelve caliphs because they know they can't leave these strong narrations undealt with.

You are mistaken, the twelvers do have a present & living Imam. He is Twelfth & final Imam, the Son of Imam al-'askari (as) who will rise to bring peace & justice in the earth just as it will have been fillled with tyranny and injustice.

We have many explicit & authentic narrations this regard, but the same cannot be said for the 'Ismailis' or the so called 'Imam' agha khan.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#18

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 1:14 am

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
KA786110 wrote: Javed's post is relevant to the topic of the thread and provided ample historical evidence that Mowlana Imam Ismail (as) was the successor and rightful Imam after Imam Jaffar Sadiq (as)

Hadith of Thaqalayn is valid and sahih. The hadith of the twelve successors is suspect. Both cannot be valid at the same time. Hadith of Thaqalayn mentions that Qur'an and Ahle bayt Imam will remain together until the day of judgement (they reach Kawthar). But twelvers have no present living Imam.
Again take it one point at a time..is it so difficult for you? Not a siingle authentic hadeeth has been quoted to support the 'Imamate' of Ismail.

'Ample evidence' but no narrations have been mentioned. I can bring you enough clear, precise narrations on the Imamate of al-kadhim (as).

Side note: I also find it funny because the Ismailis don't have their own proper collections of ahadith & instead have to rely largely upon twelver sources.

Even the book, Daim ul Islam written by Qadi al-nu'man has an entire section on Wilayat..yet nothing dedicated to the Imams beyond as-sadiq (as).

If the ahadith regarding the twelve successors were suspect then you wouldn't so many 'sunni' ulama actually comment on the narrations (even though they technically don't believe in imamate) so much so that they try to bring up a list of their own twelve caliphs because they know they can't leave these strong narrations undealt with.

You are mistaken, the twelvers do have a present & living Imam. He is Twelfth & final Imam, the Son of Imam al-'askari (as) who will rise to bring peace & justice in the earth just as it will have been fillled with tyranny and injustice.

We have many explicit & authentic narrations this regard, but the same cannot be said for the 'Ismailis' or the so called 'Imam' agha khan.

P.S. I hope it isn't of a hard thing to ask of you to take things one step a time. So either we go further with the concept of Twelve Imams (as) or We can stick To Isma'il supposed nass (and I don't mean copy-paste nonsense).

I presume the latter since that's what the original thread is about. So let me ask you very clearly again:

Can you provide us with clear & authentic narrations in regards to the 'Imamate' of Isma'il by his father Imam as-sadiq (as). Along with the original Arabic & its chain of narrators?

Thanks.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#19

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 1:15 am

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
Again take it one point at a time..is it so difficult for you? Not a siingle authentic hadeeth has been quoted to support the 'Imamate' of Ismail.

'Ample evidence' but no narrations have been mentioned. I can bring you enough clear, precise narrations on the Imamate of al-kadhim (as).

Side note: I also find it funny because the Ismailis don't have their own proper collections of ahadith & instead have to rely largely upon twelver sources.

Even the book, Daim ul Islam written by Qadi al-nu'man has an entire section on Wilayat..yet nothing dedicated to the Imams beyond as-sadiq (as).

If the ahadith regarding the twelve successors were suspect then you wouldn't find for example, so many 'sunni' ulama actually comment on the narrations (even though they technically don't believe in imamate) so much so that they try to bring up a list of their own twelve caliphs because they know they can't leave these strong narrations undealt with.

You are mistaken, the twelvers do have a present & living Imam. He is Twelfth & final Imam, the Son of Imam al-'askari (as) who will rise to bring peace & justice in the earth just as it will have been fillled with tyranny and injustice.

We have many explicit & authentic narrations this regard, but the same cannot be said for the 'Ismailis' or the so called 'Imam' agha khan.

P.S. I hope it isn't of a hard thing to ask of you to take things one step a time. So either we go further with the concept of Twelve Imams (as) or We can stick To Isma'il supposed nass (and I don't mean copy-paste nonsense).

I presume the latter since that's what the original thread is about. So let me ask you very clearly again:

Can you provide us with clear & authentic narrations in regards to the 'Imamate' of Isma'il by his father Imam as-sadiq (as). Along with the original Arabic & its chain of narrators?

Thanks.



KA786110
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 9:20 am

#20

Unread post by KA786110 » Thu May 07, 2015 10:07 am

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
Again take it one point at a time..is it so difficult for you? Not a siingle authentic hadeeth has been quoted to support the 'Imamate' of Ismail.
Re-Read my post again. To accommodate you I had only discussed one point.

You have tons of made up hadiths after the lineage of Musa Kazim imams ended. Ithna Ashari's leaders had to come up with something to keep the flock in the fold. Use your God given intellect and try to see how illogical a hidden imam concept is.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#21

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 10:58 am

Re-Read my post again. To accommodate you I had only discussed one point.

You have tons of made up hadiths after the lineage of Musa Kazim imams ended. Ithna Ashari's leaders had to come up with something to keep the flock in the fold. Use your God given intellect and try to see how illogical a hidden imam concept is.
Again you failed to answer the original question which is the main dispute between us.

Not a single authentic hadeeth has been provided to support the 'Imamate' of Ismail with its original Arabic (if you have it) or the chain of narrators with it. Isma'il had never even claimed 'Imamate' for himself.

In regards to using god-given intellect..Let me give you a little food for thought...

1. If Ismail had died during as-sadiq(as)'s lifetime (Which he did according to various AHADEETH & EARLY historical reports) then how can he be an 'Imam'?

2. Why would Allah (swt) give this divine position to someone who then would cease to deserve it later either because he died during the active Imams' lifetime as the role of an 'imam' is to guide people to Allah, but Ismail didn't do this at all during his lifetime.


Look forward to your response.



KA786110
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 9:20 am

#22

Unread post by KA786110 » Thu May 07, 2015 11:47 am

Ithna Ashari's will have to believe that Imam Ismail (AS) passed away before Imam Jaffar As-Sadiq (AS) to validate Musa Kazim. The fact is that Imam Ismail's death was staged and he survived to fulfill his duty as Imam. Please re-read Javed's long post on the subject in this thread. Javed's post has provided sufficient arguments in favour of this thread's topic "Usool-a-Kafi declares Mowlana Ismail (as) is rightful Imam"


I have mentioned this in another thread:

Just think about what happened to false claimants of the Imamat (they are the enemies of Allah and Prophet(pbuh)). They just disappeared (hiding or seclusion). As Allah says to Holy Prophet in Surah Al-Kawthar Ayat 108:3:
Inna shani-aka huwal abtar (Surely your enemy is the one who shall be without posterity)

Now their followers are left to come up with creative ways to keep the ruse going.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#23

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 12:21 pm

KA786110 wrote:Ithna Ashari's will have to believe that Imam Ismail (AS) passed away before Imam Jaffar As-Sadiq (AS) to validate Musa Kazim. The fact is that Imam Ismail's death was staged and he survived to fulfill his duty as Imam. Please re-read Javed's long post on the subject in this thread. Javed's post has provided sufficient arguments in favour of this thread's topic "Usool-a-Kafi declares Mowlana Ismail (as) is rightful Imam"


I have mentioned this in another thread:

Just think about what happened to false claimants of the Imamat (they are the enemies of Allah and Prophet(pbuh)). They just disappeared (hiding or seclusion). As Allah says to Holy Prophet in Surah Al-Kawthar Ayat 108:3:
Inna shani-aka huwal abtar (Surely your enemy is the one who shall be without posterity)

Now their followers are left to come up with creative ways to keep the ruse going.

That's a nice story you mentioned but we aren't concerned with the topic of ghayba right now. The reasons & wisdom for the occultation are many which can be discussed later on a separate thread.

Again you have failed to answer my questions above, especially the main which I've asked for more than once. Let me ask you again.

Please provide us with clear, precise narrations to prove 'Ismail's supposed Imamate, with its original Arabic & chain of narrators.

So I guess I'm still waiting for answer ;)



KA786110
Posts: 360
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 9:20 am

#24

Unread post by KA786110 » Thu May 07, 2015 12:25 pm

Please re-read Javed's long post on the subject in this thread. Javed's post has provided sufficient arguments in favour of this thread's topic "Usool-a-Kafi declares Mowlana Ismail (as) is rightful Imam"

The made up narrations and chains are your forte. The main subject of this topic has been proven without any doubt. But you may chose to ignore it. :)



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#25

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 12:42 pm

KA786110 wrote:Please re-read Javed's long post on the subject in this thread. Javed's post has provided sufficient arguments in favour of this thread's topic "Usool-a-Kafi declares Mowlana Ismail (as) is rightful Imam"

The made up narrations and chains are your forte. The main subject of this topic has been proven without any doubt. But you may chose to ignore it. :)
Lol, again you failed to answer my question because you know your madhab is hanging on a thin line. Is it so hard to answer a simple question.

I have read Javeds post & unfortunately it does not provide any answers to my question. Most of what he has copy-pasted has been answered on shiachat.com



JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

#26

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu May 07, 2015 8:31 pm

I have read Javeds post & unfortunately it does not provide any answers to my question. Most of what he has copy-pasted has been answered on shiachat.com
I do not participate in Shia.chat

How about this brother Khadim: http://ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who ... #more-1570

I have four other Proofs of Imamah from Seth Carney but I don't think Admin will allow them as they are very long. Try the above link where Carney has also contributed his thoughts.. Even Daftary, who was and I believe is a 12er agrees with same aspects. I guess you will say Daftary is paid by Aga Khan (not true at all). He is the head of IIS but works with other scholars and researchers so he cannot twist stuff.

Good luck.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#27

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 9:08 pm

JavedhJuma wrote:
I have read Javeds post & unfortunately it does not provide any answers to my question. Most of what he has copy-pasted has been answered on shiachat.com
I do not participate in Shia.chat

How about this brother Khadim: http://ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who ... #more-1570

I have four other Proofs of Imamah from Seth Carney but I don't think Admin will allow them as they are very long. Try the above link where Carney has also contributed his thoughts.. Even Daftary, who was and I believe is a 12er agrees with same aspects. I guess you will say Daftary is paid by Aga Khan (not true at all). He is the head of IIS but works with other scholars and researchers so he cannot twist stuff.

Good luck.
Yes some of the main content of that article has already been responded to on Shiachat.

Well Daftary is a good source for alot of things but is unfortunately not a hujjah upon us. What is hujjah are the riwayat of the Prophet (saws) & the Imams (as).

Anyways I'm still waiting for a response for my simple question above.



Khadhim Al Mahdi
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:44 pm

#28

Unread post by Khadhim Al Mahdi » Thu May 07, 2015 9:12 pm

Khadhim Al Mahdi wrote:
JavedhJuma wrote: I do not participate in Shia.chat

How about this brother Khadim: http://ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who ... #more-1570

I have four other Proofs of Imamah from Seth Carney but I don't think Admin will allow them as they are very long. Try the above link where Carney has also contributed his thoughts.. Even Daftary, who was and I believe is a 12er agrees with same aspects. I guess you will say Daftary is paid by Aga Khan (not true at all). He is the head of IIS but works with other scholars and researchers so he cannot twist stuff.

Good luck.
Yes some of the main content of that article has already been responded to on Shiachat.

Well Daftary is a good source for alot of things but is unfortunately not a hujjah upon us. What is hujjah are the riwayat of the Prophet (saws) & the Imams (as) as rejecting them on baseless grounds is tantamount to rejecting the Qur'an.

As you will agree, we have the have been ordered to follow the Qur'an & the Ahlulbayt (as) both together as they are inseparable, hence my question which I'm still waiting for a response for.

We also both believe that Imam Ja'far as-sadiq (as) would never leave the Shi'a in a state of confusion about who his successor would be despite the hostile environment of that time, hence the title 'as-sadiq'.
Please provide us with clear, precise narrations to prove 'Ismail's supposed Imamate, with its original Arabic & chain of narrators including full references of the hadeeths.
Once we've tackled this, then we can move onto other aspects of Isma'il & the other fatimi caliphs.



JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

#29

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu May 07, 2015 10:42 pm

Please provide us with clear, precise narrations to prove 'Ismail's supposed Imamate, with its original Arabic & chain of narrators including full references of the hadeeths.

What I have provided are proofs but you seem to be asking the same question. Why don't you start with your original Arabic and chain of narrators , etc.

If Imam Ismail, AS Imamat was not valid, there would be no Imam now from his progeny. He would have disappeared like the rest of them. This is the proof of Imam Ismail's Imamat. If you do not accept it, it is your prerogative. I have given you detailed history and if you still insist then keep looking for but your Imamat of Musa Kazim has unfortunately ended. Just read Ismaili gnosis I posted here.

I cannot post any more from Seth Carney, which is the only other proof I have. If Admin does not want to post it, I have to respect that.



JavedhJuma
Posts: 403
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:47 pm

#30

Unread post by JavedhJuma » Thu May 07, 2015 11:00 pm

Badri Janab and Munira bahen,

You are always beating up on the Ithnas and when they respond you run away and leave others to fight your battles. if you did not have guts to face brother Khadim, then why did you muddy the waters. You hypocrites! Come out of your cocoons and defend yourselves.

Brother Khadim,

On behalf of my bohora friends, I have to say something to you.

You may think they have accepted your Musa Kazim's Imamat. They never will. At the moment they are going through the turmoil and are vulnerable and you guys are taking advantage of them but believe me when things get better, they will go back to their beliefs. They are very strong in their beliefs. I know them. I work with them and I eat and sit with them. You will never be able to win them over. They have to be somewhere for Mohorram and Ramadhan so they will join you. When their doors reopen they will be back with their Imamat and Da'i.

Those who convert to Sunni Islam, they will probably stay put.

Some of them have explored Ismailism, but unlike the Ithnas we are not anxious to convert them. It takes minimum six months to learn the whole history and set of prayers, which are not easy. Even then, there is no guarantee one can become Ismaili. It is faster with you guys. I know at least one person who was accepted into Ismailism because he was very sincere and he had looked at it for a long long time and learned a lot by reading a lot.

Take the example of Seth Carney, he truly wanted to convert but could not convert before his death. He wrote a lot on Ismailism and other papers and still he was denied. Please do not ask me why for I have no answers. We exchanged e mails and before I knew it he was gone.