6th Imam Molana Ismail a.s. bin Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s.

Given modern distractions, the need to understand Islam better has never been more urgent. Through this forum we can share ideas and hopefully promote the true spirit of Islam which calls for peace, justice, tolerance, inclusiveness and diversity.
badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

6th Imam Molana Ismail a.s. bin Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s.

#1

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:58 am

Please Note: I have not penned down article below. It is copied from source considered as authentic and true lover of Ahlebait. So, I do not deserve any credit for hardwork below.

Bismillah'hir Rahman'nir Raheem / Ya Mohammad / Ya Ali


IMAM ISMAIL a.s. BIN IMAM JAFAR SADIK a.s


Abu Muhammad Ismail was born in Medina between 100/719 and 103/722. Imam Ismail is also known as an absolute Lord (az-azbab-i itlaq). He was born by the first wife of Imam Jafar Sadik, named Fatima bint al-Hussain al-Athram bin al-Hasan bin Ali. Shahrastani (an Ithna Asheri scholar) (1076-1153) writes in Kitab al-milal wa’l nihal that during the lifetime of Fatima, Imam Jafar Sadik never got another marriage like Muhammad with Khadija and Ali with Fatima. Where else Hz. Musa Kazim was son of women slave (women slave - bought from market or won in war booty) with name Hamidah Khātūn. Hatim bin Imran bin Zuhra (d. 498/1104) writes in al-Usul wa’l Ahakam that, "Ismail was the most perfect, the most learned and the most excellent of the sons of Jafar as-Sadik."

ALL THE FATIMI ISMAILI MUSTALI IMAMS ARE SON OF PROPER & FAZILA MUSLIMA MOTHER. Where else last six Imam's of Ithna Asheri are son of slave-women.

The early life of Imam Ismail is obscure except few fragmented records. Asraru’n-Nutaqa writes, "When Ismail completed 7 years of age, the Lord of religion (Jafar Sadik) declared him the master of religion and his heir-apparent, as his next in descent. He guarded him from his other sons, kept him away from the contact with the public, and his education went on under his own supervision." According to Marifat Akhbari’r-Rijal (comp. after 280/890) that in the absence of his father from Medina, Ismail acted on behalf of his father as the head of family. It is also related in Uyun’l-Akhbar (comp. 842/1438) that Mualli bin Khunyas, a wealthy Iranian and a famous narrator was killed and his property was confiscated by the order of the Abbasid governor of Medina, Daud bin Ali. Masudi (d. 346/958) also asserts in his Kitab al-Tanbih wal Ishraf (Leiden, 1894, p. 329) that Daud bin Ali had killed many persons by order of Abul Abbas, the first Abbasid caliph and the number of victims was about eighty persons. While in the matter of Mualli bin Khunyas, however, Imam Jafar Sadik was absent from Medina, therefore, Imam Ismail solvedthe dispute in 133/751.

Riyah bin Uthman al-Murri, the Abbasid governor in Medina burnt the house of Ahl al-Bayt, and Imam Ismail was decided to be killed. Ahmad bin Ali Najashi (d. 450/1058) writes in his Kitabal-Rijal (Bombay, 1917, pp. 81-2) that once caliph Mansur summoned Imam Jafar Sadik and hisson Ismail to Iraq, where he found no chance to kill them, and thus their lives were spared, butBassam bin Abdullah al-Sayrafi was executed instead. Muhammad Hussain al-Muzzafari quotesImam Jafar Sadik as saying in his al-Sadik (2:119) that, "Ismail was planned two times for killing, but I prayed for his life, and God protected him."

The succession issue of Imam Jafar Sadik has become a mystery in the extant sources. We are faced with fact as with legend and myth, conjecture, hypothesis and prejudice of the historians. Committed in the heat of strife by the Shi’ite authors, they were continuously repeated by those who followed them. And finally, all this was inherited by the orientalists, who, after relying toomuch on these crumbs, endorsed many of these errors.

Imam Ismail was declared several times by his father as his successor. According to Asraru’n-Nutaqa (comp. 380/990), Imam Jafar Sadik said, "He is the Imam after me, and what you learnfrom him is just the same as if you have learnt it from me." It is also related that when the healthof Imam Jafar Sadik became impaired, he summoned the most trusted amongst his followers, andthose members of his family who were alive, and did what his predecessors had done, i.e., hehanded over the authority of Imamate to Ismail. The most trusted followers of Imam Jafar Sadik supported Imam Ismail, notably Abu Hamza Thabit bin Abu Sufiya Dinar as-Samali (d. 150/767).

W. Ivanow (1886-1970) writes in Ismailis and Qarmatians (JBBRAS, Bombay, 1940, p. 57)that, "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." W. Montgomery Watt writes in The Formative Period of Islamic Thought (Edinburgh, 1973, p. 271) that, "The Ismailites derive their name from the fact that they consider that the Imam after Jafar as-Sadik was his son Ismail and not Musa al-Kazim."

The historians refer to the tradition that Imam Ismail had died during his father’s lifetime, but thefollowers of Imam Ismail refused to believe this rumour. Shahrastani (1076-1153) writes in Kitabal-milal wa’l nihal (London, 1984, p. 144) that, "Some of them (followers of Ismail) say that he did not die, but that his father had declared that he had died to save him from the Abbasid caliphs; and that he had held a funeral assembly to which Mansur’s governor in Medina was made a witness."

During the rule of the first Abbasid caliph, Abdullah as-Saffah, the Alids in Medina kept quiet andaffairs remained stationary. But when Mansur assumed the power in 136/753, the Alidsembittered by the usurpation of their rights. Thus, an-Nafs az-Zakia, the son of Abdullah al-Mahdrefused to take the oath of allegiance to Mansur. It was the month of Ramzan, 145/December, 762 when the Abbasid commander Isa bin Musa spurred his horses towards Medina to crush theuprising of an-Nafs az-Zakia. It was very critical moment, and many families evacuated the city. On this juncture, Imam Ismail a.s. also managed to leave Medina secretly with the outgoing caravans. Tabari (3:226) and Baladhuri (d. 279/892) in Ansab al-Ashraf (5:617) write that, "On 12th Ramzan, 145 (December 4, 762), Isa bin Musa camped at al-Jurf, where he entered intocorrespondence with many notables of Medina, including some Alids. Many of them left the city with their families and some even joined Isa, a move which created a sense of insecurity and led toa large scale evacuation of Medina." When the veritable fighting took place with the Abbasids, an-Nafs az-Zakia was left with only a small number of his followers. Tabari (3:249) writes that, "His followers took to flight, and he himself was killed on the 14th Ramzan, 145 (December 6, 762). "His brother, Ibrahim, wandering from Medina to Aden, Syria, Mosul, Anbar until he finally settled in Basra in 145/762 to propagate for his brother. He also rebelled two months after his brother’s revolt, and seized control of Basra.

Tradition has it that Imam Ismail went to Basra after leaving Medina, but it seems improbable asafter the defeat of an-Nafs az-Zakia in Medina in 145/762, his brother Ibrahim mustered a largearmy in Basra, hatching a massive revolt against the Abbasids, therefore, Imam Ismail must havehidden himself elsewhere in Arabia, and when the condition had become congenial, he wouldhave harboured himself in Basra. Ibrahim left Basra for Kufa after some time, but was killed in a battle at Bakhamri, about halfway between Wasit and Kufa.

The critical examination of the sources suggests that the Abbasids had added a twist to this puzzleafter few years with the help of the predeceased tradition for Imam Ismail, broadcastingeverywhere that Imam Jafar Sadik had changed the nass (investiture) in favour of his other son,Musa Kazim. This newly contrived theory took its early nourishment among the people wholacked the concept of the Imamate. The later sources, trusting on it, however endorse threedifferent reasons for the change of nass i.e., Imam Ismail’s indulgence in drink in 138/755, hisintriguing in the extremists circles in 143/760, and his death during his father’s life time in145/762. It deserves to note that some bombastic stories of Imam Ismail’s indulgence in drink and his alleged association with the extremists have been condemned by many historians.Mufazal bin Umar as-Sayrafi however relates that Imam Jafar Sadik, in view of his son’s piety hadalready warned the people in Medina that, "Do not wrong Ismail" (la tajafu Ismaila).

Caliph Mansur had not yet exhausted in his plan, for he had another card to play, and there is areason to suppose that the story of change of nass had been concocted in the Zaidite orbits. It wasrolled in public most probably after the death of Imam Jafar Sadik in 148/765, otherwise theImam himself would have refuted it. It aimed to force Imam Ismail to expose to repudiate theclaim of Musa Kazim. But, as we have heretofore seen that Imam Ismail had tenaciously determined not to expose as it was a diplomacy of the Abbasids to arrest him. Consequently, thepredeceased tradition took its root. Imam Ismail’s exposition would have also given free rope tothe Abbasids to upbraid Imam Jafar Sadik, who is said to have produced a document to caliph Mansur, bearing signature of the persons, testifying the alleged death of his son.

The Abbasids had gained power on the slogans of the Alids. Later, it took a political shape to theright of caliphate in the house of Abbas on religious ground. Abbas as-Saffah was to be succeeded by his son like the Imamate’s doctrine in the house of Ali bin Abu Talib from father to son.Conversely, Abbas as-Saffah was succeeded by his brother, Mansur. He determined to have asame effect that a brother could succeed by a brother. Thus, the Abbasids seems to have put into circulation a tradition of change of nass in the house of Imam Jafar Sadik by putting forth the claim of Musa Kazim. Thus, the Abbasids gained more than one benefit. Many Shi’ite followers, who had acquired the knowledge of the doctrines of Imamate from Imam Muhammad Bakir andImam Jafar Sadik, however, ruled out the theory of change of nass.

Imam Jafar Sadik is also reported to have said: Inlillah fi kullo shain bida illah imamah means, "Verily, God makes changes in everything except in the matter of Imam." It tends to prove thatonce Ismail had been designated as an Imam, the spiritual authority of Imam Jafar Sadik came tothe hands of his successor, and the status of Imam Jafar Sadik becomes same as he was beforeacquiring spiritual authority from his father. This point merits further indication that Imam JafarSadik had no power to cancel, revoke or alter the first nass in favour of Imam Ismail, andtherefore, the tradition of change of nass carries no historicity. The European scholar Marshall Hodgson writes in The Order of the Assassins (Netherland, 1955, p. 63) that, "Such a withdrawal (of nass ) evidently was not historical." Nawbakhti (d. 310/912) writes in Kitab Firaq al-Shi’a that, "Yet another version is that by appointing his son, Ismail, as an Imam, Jafar Sadik thus resigned. Ismail was therefore a real Imam, and after him, the Imamate has to pass to his son, Muhammad." Shahrastani (1076-1153) also writes in Kitab al-milal wa’l-nihal (p. 144) that, "Designation (nass), however, cannot be withdrawn, and has the advantage that the Imamate remains in the descendants of the person designated, to the exclusion of others. Therefore, the Imam after Ismail is Muhammad bin Ismail."

The Abbasids brought Musa Kazim to lodge claim for his right on one side, and made an intensified search of Imam Ismail on other, indicating that Imam Ismail was a legitimate Imam in the eyes of the Abbasids. W. Ivanow writes in Ismailis and Qarmatians (JBBRAS, Bombay, 1940, p. 58) that, "Musa apparently was recognized by the secular authorities as the legitimate successor of Imam Jafar in his position, so far as it was concerned with the outer world." W. Montgomery Watt also writes that the political moderates had preferred Musa Kazim, vide The Formative Period of Islamic Thought (Edinburgh, 1973, p. 271). The Abbasids mustered a large following for Musa Kazim in Medina, and the snares of spies were also planted to watch signs of disloyalty emanating from him. The Abbasids then intended to gather the scattered Shi’ites at Medina under the leadership of Musa Kazim, and strike a final blow upon them to getan end of the concept of the Imamate.

Abul Khattab (d. 167/783) was an eminent disciple of Imam Jafar Sadik. He was first to have preached the Shi’ite doctrines tinctured with esoteric interpretation. For quite some time, he was closely associated with Imam Jafar Sadik, who had commissioned him as his chief da’i in Kufa. When Imam Ismail had been in Iraq, he adopted the title of Abul Khattab most probably after151/769 for exercising taqiya. Nawbakhti in Kitab Firaq al-Shi’a (Istanbul, 1931, pp. 60-61) and al-Qummi (d. 300/912) in Kitab al-Maqalat wa’l-Firaq (Tehran, 1963, p. 83) write thatthe followers of Abul Khattab (i.e., Ismail) became known as Khattabiyya, believing that "the divine light had transferred from Jafar Sadik into Abul Khattab, and on the death of the latter, it passed into Muhammad bin Ismail." The term Abul Khattab here was the epithet of Imam Ismail. Abul Khattab however was killed most possibly in 167/783.

Besides, Imam Ismail had to assume the pseudonym of al-Mubarak in certain cases to protect his life. Al-Mubarak was a servant of Imam Ismail in Medina. In all probability, al-Mubarak was alsothe epithet of Imam Ismail. More evidences of the application of the name al-Mubarak to Ismailhave now come to light, lending strong support to W. Ivanow’s hypothesis, vide The Alleged Founder of Ismailism (Bombay, 1946, pp. 108-112), describing that, "I have happened upon such clear and unequivocal testimony concerning al-Mubarak. The fact that it was in reality the surname of Ismail b. Jafar is revealed in at least four different passages in the early Ismaili esoteric work, Sullamu’n-Najjat by Abu Yaqub as-Sijistani" (p. 111). It can be also ascertained from another work of Abu Yaqub as-Sijistani, entitled Ithbat al-Nubuwwat (Beirut, 1966, p.190).

Hence, another small following of Imam Ismail became known as Mubarakiyya. The Fatimid Imam al-Mahdi had sent a letter in Yamen after 308/921, which is reproduced by Jafar bin Mansur al-Yamen in al-Fara’id wa Hudud ad-Din (pp. 13-19), in which the Imam has alsodisclosed that the Imams descending from Imam Jafar Sadik wished to resuscitate the true dawat, and feared the treachery of hypocrites, therefore, they assumed names other than theirown, and used for themselves esoterically names denoting the rank of proofs (hujjats) and styledthemselves as Mubarak, Maymun and Sa’id because of the good omen in these names.

The terms Mubarakiyya and Khattabiyya therefore, were the original names of the nascent Ismailism, as well as the regional identifications of the followers of Imam Ismail, who, on the whole, merged into the main fold of Ismailism in the time of Imam Muhammad bin Ismail. Concluding his judgment, al-Mutawakkil (532-566/1137-1170) writes in his Kitab Haqa’iq al-Marifa as quoted by Bernard Lewis in The Origins of Ismailism (London, 1940, p. 35) that, "The Ismailiyya are the Mubarakiyya and the Khattabiyya."

Imam Ismail mostly lived in Salamia, and then moved to Damascus. Mansur knew his where abouts, and wrote to his governor to arrest him, but the Imam quitted Damascus for Basra. Imam Ismail’s presence in Basra was marked in 151/769. According to Tarikh-i Jhangusha, "A paralytic begged alms of him. Ismail took him by the hand and he was healed; and rising to hisfeet he departed in his company. Ismail also prayed for a blind person and he recovered his sight."

Imam Jafar Sadik had realized the significance of a tight, well-knit and secret organization to face the emerging challenges in Arab society. For that purpose, he employed his Iranian client (mawla), named Maymun al-Qaddah, who had a skill for organizing the vast network of an underground mission. The Arabs, it must be noted, were not traditionally and temperamentally suited for secretive and underground functioning. They had always lived in an open and free society in the desert without the paraphernalia of state and political intrigues.

De Lacy O’Leary writes in Short History of the Fatimid Khilafat (London, 1923, p. 25) that, "The Ismailians alone have inherited the accurate knowledge of secret mysteries bequeathed by Jafar as-Sadik to his son Ismail." W. Ivanow writes in Ismailis and Qarmatians (JBBRAS, Bombay, 1940, p. 59) that, "The successors of Ismail were therefore compelled to pay moreattention to the other aspect of Imam Jafar’s heritage - the philosophical and esoteric theories, which were more in demand here. This probably defined the further course of the evolution of Ismailism, which though it never gave up its strictly Islamic substance, had, nevertheless, tore concile it with the philosophy of the time."

Imam Ismail died in Salamia after bequeathing the office of Imamate to his son Muhammad. According to al-Usul wa’l Ahakam by Hatim bin Imran bin Zuhra (d. 498/1104) that, "Ismail had sent his da’is to all parts and ordered him (Muhammad) to administer the oath in his name according to the custom of all preceding Imams. When his death drew near, he appointed as his heir, his son Imam Muhammad Shakir a.s. who showed great perfection."

Wa aakhiro dawana anil hamdo lillah'he Rabbil aalameen.



sixfeetunder
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am

#2

Unread post by sixfeetunder » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:23 am

Where else Hz. Musa Kazim was son of londi (women slave - bought from market or won in war booty) with name Hamidah Khātūn. Hatim bin Imran bin Zuhra (d. 498/1104) writes in al-Usul wa’l Ahakam that, "Ismail was the most perfect, the most learned and the most excellent of the sons of Jafar as-Sadik."

ALL THE FATIMI ISMAILI MUSTALI IMAMS ARE SON OF PROPER MUSLIMA MOTHER. Where else last six Imam's of Ithna Asheri are son of slave-women.
Before trying to denigrate the mother of Imam Musa Al-Kazim, you should find out who Bibi Hajar was. She gave birth to 2 Prophets - Ismael and Isaac. When you go to Hajj and run in between Safa and Marwa, remember that you are repeating her act and honoring her. Allah has honored her. Would you now reconsider the derogatory words you have used for Hamidah Khatun?



Doctor
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2010 7:16 am

#3

Unread post by Doctor » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:37 am

Mr. Sixfeetunder, there is no relation between wife of Prophet Ibrahim Khaleelullah (a.s.) and mother of Hz. Musa Kazim.

Don't you agree that 'Hamdia Khatun' was slave-women?



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

#4

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 6:40 am

Please prove she was not slave women?



sixfeetunder
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am

#5

Unread post by sixfeetunder » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:05 am

Doctor wrote:Mr. Sixfeetunder, there is no relation between wife of Prophet Ibrahim Khaleelullah (a.s.) and mother of Hz. Musa Kazim.
According to Muslim belief, Hagar was the Egyptian handmaiden of Abraham's first wife Sarah. Hagar is honoured as an especially important matriarch of monotheism, as it was through Ishmael that the prophet Muhammad would come. Sarah was barren, hence Hagar was offered to Ibrahim to bear a child. Now, whether Ibrahim formally 'married' her in the modern sense of the word, or not, is for you to find out. Nonetheless, his union with Hagar was obviously legitimate. So, it remains that Hagar was formally an Egyptian handmaid or 'slave'. So, if a 'slave-woman' can bear Prophets, the argument about Bibi Hamida Khatoon falls flat in the face.
Don't you agree that 'Hamdia Khatun' was slave-women?
Following his wife's death Al-Sadiq purchased a slave of Berber origin named Hamidah Khātūn (Arabic: حميدة خاتون‎), freed her, trained her as an Islamic scholar, and then married her. She bore Mūsá al-Kāżim (the seventh Shi’ah Imam) and Muhammad al-Dibaj and was revered by the Shī‘ah, especially by women, for her wisdom. She was known as Hamidah the Pure. Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq used to send women to learn the tenets of Islam from her, and used to remark about her, "Hamidah is pure from every impurity like the ingot of pure gold."



sixfeetunder
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am

#6

Unread post by sixfeetunder » Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:11 am

Hence, it is immaterial whether Bibi Hamida Khatoon was formerly a slave or not. What is disturbing, is that you should use denigrating words for her, to prove Janaab Ismael's legitimacy as Imam.

If you consider Janaab Ismael as the true successor to Imam Jafar as-Sadiq, be it! For that you don't need to denigrate the mother of Imam Musa al-Kadhim. You can provide other good arguments instead of indulging in cheap theatrics. Very unbecoming of Bohra gentleman behavior. No different than 'olaa jaahil musalmaan'



Muslim First
Posts: 6892
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am

#7

Unread post by Muslim First » Fri Sep 14, 2012 8:12 am

ALL THE FATIMI ISMAILI MUSTALI IMAMS ARE SON OF PROPER & FAZILA MUSLIMA MOTHER. Where else last six Imam's of Ithna Asheri are son of slave-women.
Admin
AS

Why this kind of post is allowed (my Imam is better then 12ver Imam)? While my last post was deleted.



MM Bukhari
Posts: 157
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 4:58 am

#8

Unread post by MM Bukhari » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:01 am

honest question.....

what is difference between a muslima woman and a slave woman(who has retain her Chasity)?



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

#9

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:12 am

sixfeetunder wrote: According to Muslim belief, ...So, it remains that Hagar was formally an Egyptian handmaid or 'slave'.
From Prophem Mohammed s.a.w.w. till Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s. - who has vetted above belief, name of book please (preferably non-Ithna Asheri)?
sixfeetunder wrote:Following his wife's death Al-Sadiq purchased a slave of Berber origin named Hamidah Khātūn (Arabic: حميدة خاتون‎), freed her, trained her as an Islamic scholar, and then married her. She bore Mūsá al-Kāżim (the seventh Shi’ah Imam) and Muhammad al-Dibaj
My friend, I am trying to compare afzaliyat of both wives of Imam Sadik a.s.

Below not married to second women till first was alive and from that beloved first the Masoom was borned:
> Propoeht Mohammed + Khadeeja a.s. = Molatina Fatima a.s...........>> Molatina Khadeeja afzal than all wives.
> Mola Ali a.s. + Molatina Fatima a.s. = Imam Hussain a.s...................>> Molatina Fatima bint Nabi afzal than all wives.
> Imam Jaffer Sadik + Molatina Fatima (r) = Imam Ismail a.s...............>> Molatina Fatima afzal than Bibi Hamida Khatoon and others.

Further to above, an "aazad" is afzal than "ghulam". So, by this simple tocken Molatina Fatima mother of Imam Ismail is superior to 2nd wife of Imam Sadik: Bibi Hamida Khatoon.

Hence when we compare those two ladies: mother of Molana Imam Ismail a.s. is afzal than mother of Hz. Musa Kazim.



sixfeetunder
Posts: 433
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:48 am

#10

Unread post by sixfeetunder » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:38 am

badrijanab wrote:
sixfeetunder wrote: According to Muslim belief, ...So, it remains that Hagar was formally an Egyptian handmaid or 'slave'.
From Prophem Mohammed s.a.w.w. till Imam Jaffer Sadik a.s. - who has vetted above belief, name of book please (preferably non-Ithna Asheri)?
It is common knowledge that Hagar was the handmaiden of Sarah. I am not a scholar that I can quote you reference instantly. I am sure you would find it in Bohra books too. It is agreed upon by all Muslim sects, AFAIK. So, if you do not agree with what everyone agrees, you should bring your proof that Hagar was a 'free' woman and not a slave of Sarah.
sixfeetunder wrote:Following his wife's death Al-Sadiq purchased a slave of Berber origin named Hamidah Khātūn (Arabic: حميدة خاتون‎), freed her, trained her as an Islamic scholar, and then married her. She bore Mūsá al-Kāżim (the seventh Shi’ah Imam) and Muhammad al-Dibaj
badrjanab wrote: My friend, I am trying to compare afzaliyat of both wives of Imam Sadik a.s.

Below not married to second women till first was alive and from that beloved first the Masoom was borned:
> Propoeht Mohammed + Khadeeja a.s. = Molatina Fatima a.s...........>> Molatina Khadeeja afzal than all wives.
> Mola Ali a.s. + Molatina Fatima a.s. = Imam Hussain a.s...................>> Molatina Fatima bint Nabi afzal than all wives.
> Imam Jaffer Sadik + Molatina Fatima (r) = Imam Ismail a.s...............>> Molatina Fatima afzal than Bibi Hamida Khatoon and others.

Further to above, an "aazad" is afzal than "ghulam". So, by this simple tocken Molatina Fatima mother of Imam Ismail is superior to 2nd wife of Imam Sadik: Bibi Hamida Khatoon.

Hence when we compare those two ladies: mother of Molana Imam Ismail a.s. is afzal than mother of Hz. Musa Kazim.
'Azaad' is azaad by chance and 'ghulam' is ghulam by chance. Not through one's own efforts. It is by accident of birth and not conviction of mind. Going by your logic, Bibi Hajar was not so 'afzal', compared to Sarah and hence Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) would have been better off had he been born through progeny of Sarah.

"Nobility is a matter of good intellect and good conduct, not of lineage and descent" - Imam Ali (a.s)



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#11

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:51 am

Further to above, an "aazad" is afzal than "ghulam".
This is actually a big load of crap. Afzal is determined by your deeds and your aqeeda and not your status in society. Bilal was a slave whose status is greater than any 2 bit badrijanab!! If everything else is equal, only then is a free man better than a ghulam. It is time for you to change your books and your "authentic" sources.
So, I do not deserve any credit for hardwork below.
You should take credit for copy and paste at least, no??



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

#12

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 9:58 am

Mr. Sixfeetunder,

You are claiming that Molatina Hagar was slave. So it is your responsibility to prove it? If you cannot prove your claim then it is infered as you are making false calim.

Below not married to second women till first was alive and from that beloved first the Masoom was borned:
> Propoeht Mohammed + Khadeeja a.s. = Molatina Fatima a.s...........>> Molatina Khadeeja afzal than all wives.
> Mola Ali a.s. + Molatina Fatima a.s. = Imam Hussain a.s...................>> Molatina Fatima bint Nabi afzal than all wives.
> Imam Jaffer Sadik + Molatina Fatima (r) = Imam Ismail a.s...............>> Molatina Fatima afzal than Bibi Hamida Khatoon and others.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#13

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:06 am

Bibi Hagar (ra) has been mentioned as a slave woman in the Bible and in the hadith of the prophet (saw).

From Sahih Bukhari

....... The tyrant then gave hajar as a girl-servant to Sarah. Sarah came back (to Abraham) while he was praying. Abraham, gesturing with his hand, asked, "What has happened?" She replied, "Allah has spoiled the evil plot of the infidel (or immoral person) and gave me hajar for service." (Abu Huraira then addressed his listeners saying, "That (hajar) was your mother, O Bani Ma-is-Sama (i.e. the Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, hajar's son)." (Book #55, Hadith #578)



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

#14

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:30 am

Abu Huraira = Jhooth ka bora

Abu Huraira is the pre-eminent narrator of Sunni Hadith. But through Sunni referances itself it is proven that he is a lier. Ilm-Rizaal (knowledge for authenticating if a hadees is true or untrue) any narrator proven to speak lie; his quotation of hadees should not be trusted. Despite this, Sunni's still quote Abu Huraira and refer him for justifying their Sunni faith! It proves their faith stands on foundation of lies.

Abu Hurairah has narrated over 5,000 ahadiths from the Holy Prophet all in the space of the three years he spent with the Holy Prophet. According to Muhammed Zubayr Siddiqui, in his book "Hadith Literature: It's Origin, Development, & Special Features," Abu Hurairah has narrated 5,374 ahadiths. In comparison, Aisha has narrated 2,210 ahadiths, Umar al-Khattab has narrated 537 ahadiths, Mola Ali (a.s.) 536 ahadiths and Abu Bakr 142 ahadiths. Abu Hurairah has narrated more from the Holy Prophet than the other four just mentioned, combined and only in the space of three years. Doesn't make any sense.

http://truthaboutshias.blogspot.com/201 ... airah.html

Abd-al-Rehman (kunya 'Abu Hurairah') was disliked by Umar bin Khattab, the 2nd Caliph. Umar bin Khattab was very upset at his habit of narrating false Ahadith in the name of the Prophet (SAAW) and threatened to exile him if he didn't stop. That frightened him and he stopped for a while. But after the assasination of Umar, Abu Hurairah resumed his mischief and was greatly encouraged by the first Ommayad ruler, Muawiyah and then his son, Yazid.

In particular, Abu Hurairah is supposed to have hated Aisha. It is a matter of record that he made up several Hadiths that Aisha directly rejected. His hatred of her was primarily based on his fear. Aisha, being the Prophet's (S) wife, was in a very favorable position to catch Abu Hurairah's tricks and she is reported to have confronted him several times.

http://muslimvilla.smfforfree.com/index ... 420.0;wap2

One of the interesting things you will read in these blogs is that Umar, the second Khalifa, was so upset with Abu Huraira that he personally beat him.

HIS POVERTY TURNED ABU HURAIRAH INTO A GREEDY THIEF

After Caliph Umar appointed Abu Huraira as governor of Bahrain in 21 A.H., the people informed the Caliph that Abu Huraira had amassed great wealth and had purchased many horses. Umar therefore deposed him in 23 A.H.

As soon as Abu Huraira entered the court, the Caliph said: "O enemy of Allah and enemy of His Book! Have you stolen Allah's Property?" He replied, "I never committed theft but the people have given me gifts." the Caliph said: "When I made you the governor of Bahrain, you had not even shoes on your feet, but now I have heard that you have purchased horses for 1,600 dinars. How did you acquire this wealth?" He replied, 'These were men's gifts which profit has multiplied much.' The Caliph's face grew red with anger, and he lashed him so furiously that his back bled. Then he ordered the 10,000 dinars which Abu Huraira had collected in Bahrain be taken from him and deposited in the account of the Baitu'-Mal. (Reference: Ibn Sa'ad in Tabaqat, Volume IV, page 90, Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Isaba, and Ibn Abd-e-Rabbih in Iqdu'l-Farid, Volume I).

Some more information for your consideration: http://abu-huraira.blogspot.com/

Allahu A'alam.

So, Mr. Anajmi we cannot trust Hadees citation from your Abu Huraira and Bible. Molatina Hagar is still not proven to be slave.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#15

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:03 am

:mrgreen:

Mr. badrijanab, I do not trust much of what you post either. So it doesn't really matter. You shouldn't be asking for evidence if you are not going to trust it. I gave you sahih hadith that an overwhelming majority of muslim ummah trust. And it is inline with past scripture. And quran asks us to believe in past scripture if they are in line with quran and hadith. It does not require us to trust in your flawless books that came later.



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

#16

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 11:49 am

As per Sunni/Wahabi dogmas: Imam Bukhari, Muslim or Abu Dawood - they are not masoom and prone to error. Thus, at core you cannot trust to all what they write.

You do not know what is right and what is wrong in Bukhari or Muslim. But you do know that both of them are not-masoom thus they are prone to mistakes. Hence what they wrote - everything is subjected to "Shak" (doubts).

Think deeply about this CORE fundamental lacuna in Sunni/Wahabi dogama!



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#17

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:12 pm

As per recently innovated anajmi dogma, Imam Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Dawood are masoom and the books that they have written are flawless. Hence, you have to accept it as true. Imam Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Dawood are flawless as per 5:55.



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

#18

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:16 pm

Mr. Anajmi, Your frustration & inablity to rationally counter is understandable :)



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#19

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:19 pm

Your acceptance of defeat is welcome.

When you say flawless, it is rational but when I say flawless, it is irrational!! Shows that your faith is based on whims and fancies!!



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#20

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:22 pm

Next time you want to counter as per your own definition of "rational", do not tell me Daim is flawless and then see how your arguments crumble like a house of cards.



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

#21

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:33 pm

FAO: Sixfeetunder

Below masoom not married to second women till first wife was alive and from that beloved first wife the Masoom was borned:

> Propoeht Mohammed + Khadeeja a.s. = Molatina Fatima a.s...........>> Molatina Khadeeja afzal than all wives.
> Mola Ali a.s. + Molatina Fatima a.s. = Imam Hussain a.s...................>> Molatina Fatima bint Nabi afzal than all wives.
> Imam Jaffer Sadik + Molatina Fatima (r) = Imam Ismail a.s...............>> Molatina Fatima afzal than Bibi Hamida Khatoon and others.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#22

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 1:43 pm

I used to think that the shias only hate the wives of the prophet (saw), but apparently, they hate wives of their own Imams as well. Shiaism comes out as more and more vile!!

Why does an Imam end up marrying a non-afzal woman from which he creates non-afzal progeny which ends up creating non-afzal multiple sects? Isn't he supposed to be "flawless" for God's sake? Why can't these flawless Imam's figure out that nothing good can come out of marrying non-afzal women?



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

#23

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 2:42 pm

My above post doesn't indicate if any Shia party hate wife of Imam Sadik. It is only intended to exhibit which wife is afzal than others. Like, Molantina Fatima bint Nabi was afzal than other wives of Mola Ali a.s. - making this statement doesn't mean mumineen hate other wives of Mola Ali a.s.



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

#24

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 3:04 pm

Anajmi, Abu Huraira - is proven to be not trustworthy! Per your own caliph. So, on what ground do you accept his quoated hadees to be trustworthy?



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#25

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:00 pm

Anajmi, Abu Huraira - is proven to be not trustworthy!
I do not accept your proof. Imam Bukhari is flawless. as per 5:55.

Allah says in the Quran that a good muslim is supposed to treat all his wives in the same way. Since Mola Ali was a good muslim, he never thought one wife was more afzal than the other. When he did not think like that, who the hell are you to tell me which wife is afzal and which is not? Whatever a wife was before marriage, once the marriage happened, they are all now at the same level!!

Can you explain why an Imam chooses to marry a non-afzal woman? Is it because of his lust?



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

#26

Unread post by badrijanab » Fri Sep 14, 2012 4:30 pm

Your point doesn't answer - when your Caliph is not trusting Abu Huraira then on what basis should one trust Abu Huraira?



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#27

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:17 pm

Imam Bukhari is flawless as per 5:55. Abu Huraira (ra) is blamed only by shia authors hence the accusation can be ignored. Now, coming back to my original question, Can you explain why an Imam chooses to marry a non-afzal woman? Is it because of his lust?



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

#28

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Fri Sep 14, 2012 5:20 pm

badrijanab wrote: As per Sunni/Wahabi dogmas: Imam Bukhari, Muslim or Abu Dawood - they are not masoom and prone to error. Thus, at core you cannot trust to all what they write.
As per dawoodi bohra dogmas, Qadi Noman was not masoom and prone to error. Hence how can you trust his quotes in Daimul Islam and consider the book to be the foundation of Bohras ?



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

#29

Unread post by badrijanab » Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:57 am

ghulam muhammed wrote:
badrijanab wrote: As per Sunni/Wahabi dogmas: Imam Bukhari, Muslim or Abu Dawood - they are not masoom and prone to error. Thus, at core you cannot trust to all what they write.
As per dawoodi bohra dogmas, Qadi Noman was not masoom and prone to error. Hence how can you trust his quotes in Daimul Islam and consider the book to be the foundation of Bohras ?
Dear GM bhai,

Everything in the book Daimul Islam was asked by Syyedina Imam Moiz a.s. and on completion of every page/chapter it was vetted by syyedina Imam Moiz a.s. Thus, from inception till end everything in Daimul Islam is in compliance with Syyedina Imam Moiz a.s. Hence, the book Daimul Islam is flawless.

Please note: Daimul Islam was wrote when the Fatimi Ismaili Imam's were in power. Unlike Aurangzeb, Ahmed Shah Abdali, Mohammed Ghori, Temur, etc who enforced their Sunni ideology on non-Sunni's (non-Hanafi's) and over Hindu's - Fatimi Imam protected faith, life, wealth, place of worship and businesses of non-Ismailies, Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims. The missionaries of non-Ismailies (like Ithna Asheri and Sunni's) were given protection to preach their non-Ismaili faith. Even they were appointed in military and government jobs. The Fatimi Ismaili period is called Golden Period in Islamic History.

Ismaili Fatimi Imams respected all faith and appeal towards noble motives - whether Sunni's or Ithna Asheri or Zayedi's or Mumineen (Fatimi) they all considered Prophet Mohammed s.a.w.w., Ali a.s., Hasan a.s., Hussain a.s., Bakir a.s. and Sadik a.s. (alay his salam) as trustworthy source of quoting Hadees. So, in Daimul Islam, even though it was published in Fatimi huqumat, all Hadees (little over 500) are quoted only from above people and none from Fatimi Imam's. So, legal system (per Daimul Islam) appeals and become acceptable to all different schools (Hanbal, Maliki, Shafai, Ithna Asheri, Zayedi, etc). Fatimi Imam's never enforced their ideology over others (displaying the compliance with "Lakum deenokum walaydeen").

In Courts, cases were decided per Daimul Islam and as all the Quoations were from above authorities accepted by all schools, the book Daimul Islam become the best reference books, not only in the then times, even now the non-Ismailies accept and quote Daimul Islam. In Iran, dominated by Ithna Asheri, Daimul Islam is official Government reference book. Hardcore Ithna Asheri like Janab Bakir Majlisi too quote and give references of Daimul Islam.

Thanks.



anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#30

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:23 am

Can you tell me if Daimul Islam allows an Imam to marry non-afzal women?