You have only commented on one school of theology withing Ahle Sunnah which is Asharii. Ahle Sunnah also have another school of theology refereed to as Maturidi. Adl is concept within the Maturidi school of theology too. Please refer to the following text. http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/aqeedah/satisfying_the_need.html It gives the view on the other theology school of Ahle Sunnah. Also just to let you know the Mutazillis were also Hanafi in fiqh, though they were not Sunni.
Also here are some excellent link on these topics. Mutazilla http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/13.htm Ashari http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/14.htm Maturidi http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/16.htm
Also refer to this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpuGv6l7eDE
Abu Bakr al-Jassas al-Hanafi's tafsir: Vision cannot be specifically implied from His statement: {Faces, on that Day, will be radiant, looking to their Lord} because “looking” has many possible meanings, such as anticipating a reward, which is narrated from a group of the salaf. Therefore, whenever that interpretation is permissible, objection to it by means of another interpretation which is not possible, is not permissible Also regarding the hadiths that supposedly support the Vision, the same author said: Regarding the narrations that are reported regarding the Vision, the intended meaning is knowledge, if [the reports] are indeed authentic. It is a sound knowledge in which there is no doubt. The use of “seeing” to mean “knowledge” is well known in the language
Thanks to everyone for their comments! As we mentioned in previous posts, it is important that we are clear and unambiguous regarding where we stand on issues. By this we mean that during (and after) the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, the Muslim community was divided into many of the similar sects that we see today. This concept of a monolithic homogeneous "salaf" who were all uniform in belief and practice is wholly fictional. Many of the groups amongst the salaf were divided on some issues and one of the issues where there was clear distinction was regarding the position of the Progeny of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. There were the majority who held that the Progeny were to be respected but their virtue was not more than the Companions as a whole. You also had the adherents of the Prophetic Progeny who held to the exclusive virtue and leadership of the Muhammadan Descendants. Then you had those who manifested hatred towards the Progeny and manifested this openly. Each group knew where they stood. There was no blurring of the boundaries. Those amongst the majority who supported the caliphate of Amir al-Mumineen, Ali bin Abi Talib, peace be upon him, did so not because they recognized his superior virtue over the other Companions but rather because he was the next best candidate. This means that their adherence to Ali was due to democratic election and not Prophetic selection or perceived exclusive virtue. Even with the election of his son al-Hassan, alayhi as salaam, afterwards, they didn't this due to exclusive devotion to the Prophetic Household. Otherwise, the election of and quietism towards the Umayyads never would have happened! Therefore, to be a supporter of Ahl al-Bayt means that one believes and adheres to their exclusive leadership and virtue. Similar is the case with the doctrines and creed that they taught. This is because "respect" can only go so far. Singing of their virtues in our anasheed is one thing but seeing them as the primary sources of religious practice and belief is something else.
Salam. May Allah bless you sister for your tireless efforts to write about Zaidiya, and Imam Rassi for your valuable contributions.
I would like to add two points: 1. As a follow up Imam Rassi, many Sunnis didnt think the first two khalifas were selected properly. Perhaps most interesting is Omar Al-Khattab's view that the election of Abu Bakr was a 'falta'(rushed and hasty decision) and if a similar means was used for selecting a khalifa he should be killed. Sahih al-Bukhari, 8:82:817 2. It is popular now among Muslims to say that lineage has no place in Islam. And while we all agree that what saves a person on the day of judgment is a sound heart (qalb saleem), not their bloodline, even in present Sunni fiqh lineage is very important. a. For example, even TODAY, in all Madhabs of Sunni fiqh, you cannot give zakat to a Hashmi. You can give them gifts but they are not allowed to take from zakat. So for all sunnis who are fulfilling this pillar of Islam, they should realize this. b. Even more interesting, it was ijma'a (by unanimous consensus) in Sunni fiqh that the Khalifah must be Quraishi. So the reality is that even sunnism emphasizes lineage when selecting a leader, the only real difference between Zaidi and Sunni in this matter is Zaidis say it must be from Ahl Bayt (i.e. descendant of Hasan or Husain) and Sunnis say must be from Quraish.
To Pro Ahlul bait regarding Maturidi: The Maturidi school hovers indecisively somewhere between the Ash’ari view and the Mu’tazilah view. According to the Maturidi school, the Ash’ari school is “close to Jabr (determinism), indeed the essence of Jabr”. Maturidi’s doctrine is that “reward and punishment are according to the use (isti’mal) of the created act, not according to the principle of creation.”… “The power by which man performs a sinful act is essentially able to effect the act of obedience, since each part of the power is conjoined with each part of the act.”… “The creating is the act of God and consists in the originating of the power in man, but the use of the originated power is the act of man.” Al Maturidi saw both sides of the argument – God’s Omnipotence and His Righteousness- and clung to both of them, but was not able to reconcile the two. For me, the Mu’tazilah doctrine is decisive, clear and comprehensible. The Maturidi position is not.
Yes, I agree with you. Even the Maturidi school has its flaws. The Mutazilla and Zaydi do make more sense in this area. However, the concept of intercession of both Mutazilla and Zaydia is vague. The Zaydia quote Bukhari where the Prophet (pbuh) will save the ummah, but do not believe in the entire ahadith itself. Also, the Zaydia say if a person dies in sin and they don't repent they die as kaffir. So if I drank alcohol and a car hit me, I die as a kaffir. Whereas if that car didn't hit me I would have a chance to repent, and not die as a kaffir. Also once a person is in hell according to Zaydia they remain there forever. I disagree with this!
With all due respect to ProAhlulBayt, I think you were terribly misinformed! The Zaydia do not say that a major sinner is a kafir. This is the position of the Kharijites. The Zaydi imams have always sought to distance themselves from this belief of the Kharijites! Even the earliest authorities maintain that the major sinners amongst the Muslims are NOT kuffar. Please refer to the translated 'Iqdu ath-Thamin on our sister site. Regarding our belief concerning the Intercession, there is nothing vague about it. The major sinners amongst the ummah will not receive the intercession! It is not that the Zaydia believe in half of Bukhari's hadith, we simply reject any hadith that contradict clear, unambiguous verses of the Qur'an. It doesnt matter who reports the hadith. Therefore, the Sahiihs of al-Bukhari, Muslim, Muwatta, Bihar al-Anwar, etc. are not absolute authorities upon every Muslim. The ONLY authorities that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, himself appointed for the Ummah to follow was the Qur'an and the Prophetic Descendants. Since the doctrine of exiting the Hellfire contradicts both the Qur'an and the Ahl al-Bayt, we reject it.
Brother IR: From your response I see a contradiction. I did mention the condition of a major sinner that doesn't repent before death.You say Zaydia does not believe major sinner are kaffirs. Then you say major sinner will not receive intercession. So if I die as a liar won't I be doomed for hell, since I didn't repent? I know for a fact that Ibn Hadid Al Mutazilli believed liars will go straight to hell. That is why his commentary is so highly trusted. It really shows how careful he was.
Brother ProAhlalBayt, Im sorry but I dont see a contradiction. Because a major sinner who dies without repenting and goes to Hell forever, this doesn't mean that s/he is a kafir. It means that they are major sinners. The Qur'an divides the two groups and makes it clear that amongst those who will dwell in Hell forever are the mushrikun AND major sinners. Allah says: {And those who do not invoke other gods with Allah; kill the soul that Allah has forbidden, except by right; and commit fornication. Whoever does such shall meet a punishment. The punishment shall be multiplied for him on the Day of Resurrection and he shall eternally abide therein, utterly debased} (Q. 25:68-69). Furthermore, Imam at-Tabari narrated in his Tafsir on the authorities of numerous exegetes amongst the salaf that the verse: {Whoever earns evil and his sin has engulfed him—they are the companions of the Fire, therein to abide forever!} (Q. 2:81) means: "those who die on sin", "those who die without repenting", etc.
Brother IR: Good Response! I will have to contact a scholar for this. Is there a concept of intercession in the Zaydia school ? Can the Prophet (sawas) and Imams (as) save anyone from entering Jahannum ?
Sallam to all . proAhlulbayt 1 I m not zaidia shia neither jafria shia . I m simply Muslim and sayyed , I m reading ur and other side response . honestly I opened holy Quran and on this matter these person are absolutely right . in Quran very clear stated " any one who enter in hell will live there for ever " even after reading Quranic verses if we go to scholor , its means we do not believe Quran we believe scholors . please do not mind instead going any where open this Allah book . all truth will be reveiled , inshahallah
Sallam to all . proAhlulbayt 1 I m not zaidia shia neither jafria shia . I m simply Muslim and sayyed , I m reading ur and other side response . honestly I opened holy Quran and on this matter these person are absolutely right . in Quran very clear stated " any one who enter in hell will live there for ever " even after reading Quranic verses if we go to scholor , its means we do not believe Quran we believe scholors . please do not mind instead going any where open this Allah book . all truth will be reveiled , inshahallah
i have been reading your articles. They seem to be good at the same time theirs a problem. The problem is that their are barely any books on the zaidi fiqh like barely anything. I would love to follow the zaidi fiqh because of the things i am hearing. Again we need to find the true zaidi fiqh books. And try to contact original zaidi scholars. I believe one of their scholars i believe his name is al houthi has been to iran before studied there and has brought some 12wers ruling and most of the zaidi tribes are starting kind of change their fiq and beliefs because of this man.Like honestly i have been on the search for the truth for atleast a year now and this zaidi madhab really is looking to be the truth with no weird fairytales and seems realistic. So if you can try to find some real info on them and find the authentic zaidis it would be cool.
salaam brother, i know exactly what you mean, I feel the same way, that it's pragmatic and realistic without the fairy-tales. Did you know I have another blog where there are already some translations of parts of important Zaidi fiqh books. It's at www.zaydiyyah.wordpress.com The Imam Rassi Society is translating them bit by bit. The section on fasting is almost ready. There is a good booklet about the Zaidi tenets of faith (aqeedah) already translated there. If you speak Spanish, the Chilean brothers have just opened their new website: www.zaydi.org They've translated entire books into Spanish! If you want to pray the Zaidi way, I have instructions on this blog, and it's quicker and easier than the Sunni way. (see June posts) I'm going to do a post about the alHouthis soon. I haven't found any concrete evidence that they are promoting 12 imamerism yet. It could be a rumour started by the Yemeni government who want to crush them. I will find out for you. Happy Ramadan!
To Pro Ahlul bait: I think the murjite position (that major sinners may still enter Paradise if Allah so wills) came about because of the political situation at the time of the Umayyads, and was promoted by the Umayyads because it suited them. They had earned the disrespect of the people through their massacre of Hussein and his followers at Karbala. Murjites advocated suspension of judgement, therefore would find no fault with Umayyad rule since judgement is the perogative of Allah.
To Pro Ahlul bait re your comment above: "Also just to let you know the Mutazillis were also Hanafi in fiqh, though they were not Sunni." It's true that some scholars adopted the mu'tazili theology, and paired that with Hanafite law. From my point of view, if Abu Hanifa got the theology wrong (on important issues like metaphorical interpretation of the Hand of Allah, Murjism and Divine Justice), why should we believe his version of Islamic law is more accurate than Zaid bin Ali's? And if Abu Hanifa was Zaid's student, and there is a difference between then on law/rituals, shouldn't we go with the teacher rather than the student? Not to mention the fact that Zaid was Ahlul bait and Abu Hanifa was not even from Qr'aish. So, for me, better to be a true Zaidi than go half way.
Imam Abu Hanifa is an Imam of fiqh not an imam of theology. As for Sunnis on the school of theology are either Asharii or Maturidi. Al Maturidi accepted Divine Justice, metaphorical interpretation etc.. Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) never pushed for imamate on this issue. Next, about Imam Zayd ibn Ali (as) on laws and rituals, I don't want to accept a Madhab based on what's on the internet. For example all 4 Sunni schools have been proven wrong in the area of divorce. Whereas the Zaydis and Jafari have been right in this area. Therefore, for this area, I have adopted their view. But again the person who gave me this information was a scholar who was well versed in ahadith narration. All narrations have to authenticated. I've seen some non-scholarly Zaydis who blindly accept Nahj al-Balaghah as 100% authentic. Yet you will Ayatollah Fadlallah an 12r shia scholar admits its not all authentic.
To what extent is Nahj El-Balagha deemed authentic? Can we ascribe its contents to Imam Ali (a.s.)?
A: Not all what is stated in Nahj Al-Balagha can be ascribed to Imam Ali (a.s). Hence, every reference of every speech or word must be studied. Nahj Al-Balagha is also not written by Ashareif Ar-Radi and many religious scholars have talked about its references in more than one book.
Publish Date: 12/28/2006 1:59:09 PM
http://english.bayynat.org.lb/QA/qa.aspx?id=112
Remember the ruler Al Mansoor was a student of Wasil ibn Ata (ra). However, what happened to all these concept when he became a ruler? Likewise Mamoon Rashid was a knowledge scholar among the Abbasids, but he still remained a tyrant.
Alhamdulilah, there are a lot of English speaking Zaydis out there now as compared to 5 years ago. However, we still haven't reached to the stage of a finding an English speaking Zaydi who is an expert in the field of Ilm-e-rijal. I know their main scholars are experts in this area, but again that knowledge has to be spread too.
Re: ProAhlulBayt's question regarding intercession, it is Zaydi belief that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, will intercede for the righteous of his ummah. This intercession would allow them to raise in their ranks and reward. One reason for this is so that they dont believe that it was their deeds that excelled them rather it was the intercession of the Rahmatul Alamin, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. Similar is the case with the intercession of the imams. However, the Prophet's intercession is an article of belief moreso than the imam's intercession.
As we previously mentioned, if a person is destined for Jahannam, no intercession can be beneficial for them. As Allah says: {They will intercede for none except those who Allah is pleased with} If Allah is not pleased with disobedience, it thereby follows that they will not receive intercession.
Re: Mohammaed Akhtar from Canada, welcome akhi! We will try to assist you in anyway we can, inshaAllah. We are in the process of translating Zaydi books into English. Also, with the activity on this blog and others as well as the efforts of Zaidia, the Chilean brothers, Awsmakka, etc., there will be a Zaydi intellectual revolution soon, with the permission of Allah.
To Pro Ahlul Bait: Abu Hanifa has a book about theology (probably written down by his students), you can see its translation at this link: http://www.islamfortoday.com/hanififiqh.htm The translator translates "bi laa kaif" as "with no modality", I prefer "with no discussion" and that is what Abu Hanifa says about the Hand (and other attributes) of Allah. You know yourself, from the biography of Imam Zaid you sent me, that Zaid would explain to his followers what the Attributes of Allah meant in their different contexts in the Qur'an, as he was expert in the Arabic language and its deep, multi-layered meanings. I thought we had agreed above that al Maturidi did not accept Divine Justice, instead he wavered indecisively between it and the Kasb stance of Ash'ari. As for the subjective study of ilm urrijal, I prefer to judge by Qur'anic principles, agreed upon historical events (like the tyrrany of the Ummayads), and reason/logic. How else can we ever know the relative truthfulness of various individuals living centuries ago?
Salaam Just because Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) says Allah has a hand, it doesn't mean he interprets the verses of the Quran which mentions hands to be a physical attribute. This is shirk. In fact even the Ashariyah do not have this interpretation either. In the book I gave you Imam Zayd ibn Ali (as) interprets the Quranic verses. Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) did not disagree with him on these interpretations. However, the disagreement occurs if Allah (swt) has a hand outside those verses. This hand again is not an atomic hand. It is a unique hand. On the contrary, the Maturidi say Allah does not have a hand period. On the opinion of Jabr and Qadr we have the opinion of Ahlul Bayt in our own books too.
Once a nomad came to Ali ibn abi Talib, inquiring about freewill and determinism? Ali ibn abi Talib asked him to stand up then asked him to lift one leg, which he did, then asked him to lift the other one, which obviously he couldn't do. At this Juncture Ali Ibn abi Talib told him that this is how much freewill there is and this is how much determinism there is.
Also, Imam Jafar as Sadiq (as) replied to this by saying "Al amru bainal amrain" The answer lies in between the two.
This narrations are found in Sunni books.
Also, just because I am a Hanafi it doesn't mean I agree with everything Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) preached. As I stated before on the issue of divorce I agree with Imam Jafar (as) and Imam Zayd ibn Ali's (as)view. Refer to this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW3pBHrW_8 Ironically the Wahabi priest Ibn Taymiyya points this out. I am not familiar with the Zaydi books on ilm-e-rijal. On top of that I have not yet seen an English speaking Zaydi speaker emphasizing much on them. If they do, then this will only benefit them against the wahabis and 12rs. The only way to defeat them is through this way. Also, let me point out that Syed Ninowy is a scholar who is master in Sunni ilm-e-rijal. He also knows the ilm-e-rijal of the 12r and the Zaydis. In fact, the Zaydi imams Sheikh Muhammad bin Muhammad Ismail Al-Mansur and Sheikh Hamoud bin Abbas al-Moayyad are among his Shaykh. He has ijza from them.
Next let me also point out that Sayyidina Shaykh Ninowy has infact received some letters from some Zaydi scholars in Yeman asking for authorization in the Isnaad to the Musnad of Imam Zayd through Abu Khaled Amru bin Khaled Al-Wasiti (ra) who narrated it from Imam Zayd.
I’m finding it really hard to see where you’re coming from Pro Ahlul bait. On the one hand you’re supporting Imam Ali’s right to the Imamate and Imam Zaid as someone to be admired and followed; on the other hand you speak of yourself as a Hanafi (i.e. Sunni). Eventually you need to take a clear stand, even if it means compromising on some of your personal opinions. I really don’t see any point in inventing a new Sunni school of thought which is only millimeters away from Zaidism. It seems to me that some Sunnis are seeing the truth of Zaidism but are too afraid to admit it. So instead, they adopt 95% of Zaidism and still call themselves “ahlus sunna”. I suspect it’s because they are afraid of the negative repercussions they will suffer if they come out openly and call themselves Zaidis. I’m glad that I don’t find myself in that position; I find myself in a situation where I can simply be a Zaidi and be proud of it.
As I stated before I would like to call myself Muslim before I call myself Sunni, Zaydi or Shia. I remember years back when I used to debate with the 12rs they use to say we can bring proof from your own books. I replied back to them by saying if the truth exist in my own books what is the need to convert ? With the Zaydis and ProAhlulBayt Sunnis its a little harder to distinguish the difference. Just like how many people have trouble distinguishing a Pro Ali Mutazilla and Zaydi.
Also I would like to present Imam Shafi's poetry.
Allahuma Salle Wa Sallim Wa Baarik Alaihi Wa Alaihim Wa alal Maulas Sayyidil Imaami Hussaini nish Shaheedi Radi Allahu Ta'ala Anhu.
My heart sighed, for my innermost being was in dejection; Sleep no longer came, and sleeplessness was bewildering. O who shall be the bearer of a message from me to Husayn, (Though the hearts and minds of some may disapprove!) Slaughtered, though without sin himself, His shirt as if dyed through with crimson. Now the sword itself wails, and the spear shrieks, And the horse which once only whinnied, laments. The world quaked for the sake of the Family of Muhammad; For their sake, the solid mountains might have melted away. Heavenly bodies sunk, the stars trembled, Oh veils were torn, and breasts were rent! He who asks blessing for the one sent from the Tribe of Hashim, But attacks his sons;truly, that is strange! And if my sin is love of the Family of Muhammad: Then that is a sin which I do not repent.
Imam Shafi'i (May Allah be pleased with him) said:
"They said, 'You are a Rafidi!', and I said, 'But no, Nor is my religion nor are my beliefs of that kind ... 'But if love of the Prophetic Household be Rafidism, Then I am the most Rafidi of the servants of God!"
Also look at the background of Imam Abu Hanifa (ra). Abu Hanifa’s shaykhs were from different persuasions and disparate sects. They were not all fuqaha’ of the main sunni community and they were not only people of opinion. Some of them were hadith scholars and some taught the fiqh of the Qur’an and the knowledge of the great Qur’anic commentator, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas. When he stayed in Makka for about six years, which is understood from some of the books we have cited, he must have studied with the Tabi‘un there who had learned the knowledge of Ibn ‘Abbas from him or from his students. Many of those he sat with in Iraq were from among the sects of the Shi‘a with all their differences. They included the Kaysanites, the Zaydites, the Twelver Imams and the Isma‘ilis. Each had an effect on his thought, even if he did not follow their leanings except in respect of his love for the House of the Prophet. He took in all those disparate elements and assimilated them to reach his final conclusion. Abu Hanifa utilised all these elements, taking the best from them, and then produced a new way of thinking and an upright opinion. (Imam Abu Hanifa, Abu Zahra pg. 24)
أري أن حالة التشتت أو الرفض أو الخروج عن النسق العام الموجود هو بسبب منهج أهل السنة والجماعة سواء كانوا من ( الأشعرية أو أهل الأثر وأصحاب الحديث)، فكلاهما، هذان المنهجان مليئان بالجبر وأن أفعال الإنسان مكتوبه عليه سلفاً، وأن الله حدد واختار - وفق رؤيتهم – أهل الجنة من أهل النار منذ الأزل، وان كل شيء مكتوب، وأن العقل مرفوض ومهمش وليست له أي قيمة، وهو الضلال والإضلال والزندقة و...الخ من التعبيرات التي تُروج في محيطنا الديني والفكري والثقافي.
- كما أن هذا المنهج السني والشيعي علي السواء مليء بالخرافات والأساطير والغيبيات التي تشل العقل المسلم ومن هذه الأمور – والتي يعتبرها منهج "المعتزلة" أهل العدل والتوحيد من الخرافات التي ما أنزل الله بها من سلطان ويتفق معنا في هذا الصدد الإخوة الإباظية: خرافة المهدي اللامنتظر – خرافة نزول عيسي عليه السلام الي الارض- خرافة المسيح الدجال، وخرافات كثير وردت في الأحاديث والروايات التي تنسب الي النبي زوراً وبهتاناً لتسوغ التجسيم والتنشبيه والمكان والجهة علي الله، هذا فضلا عن تبريرها للظلم والفقر والاستبداد والخنوع والخضوع - كل هذا - باسم الدين، وتحت ستار قال الله وقال رسوله، ودين الله ورسوله براء من كل هذا.
حالة التغلب التي انتصر فيها أهل السنة والجماعة علي من سواهم من المدارس الاسلامية - والتي كانت لها قراءة للنص مغايرة للقراءة السنية الأثرية- بقوة السلطان وبعقلية العوام، ساهمت في حالة الركود الفكري والديني بل وصلنا الي ال: تكرار وتكرار التكرار، وإعادة التكرار بصيغ واساليب مختلفة، وفقدان الإنتاج والإبداع ومحاولات كشف أبعاد جديدة للنص القرآني المتجاوز للزمان والمكان، فأصبحت أدواتنا المعرفية (وفق الرتيب السني: القرآن، السنة، الإجماع) أو فق الترتيب الشيعي ( الإمام ، القرآن، السنة) بالية، وفاشلة، ولا تغني أو تسمن من جوع، بل لا تسد نهم عقول النبهاء من أبناء الأمة، بل أصبحت مفاهيم مثل: الضلال، الهدي، المشيئة، الإرادة الإنسانية، العدل الإلهي، العقل الإنساني،...مشوهه ومعبئة بدلالات قمعية وجبرية تحكم قبضتها علي الإنسان.
وقد كتب أحد الدكاترة مقالا مطولا يتحدث فيها عن الضرر الواقع علي العقل المسلم جراء الهيمنة الدينية لمذهب اهل السنة بشقيه (الاشعري، والاثري) وكانت المقالة بعنوان: لماذا مدرسة أهل العدل والتوحيد بالذات؟ للمفكر الإسلامي د.محمد عماره، كانت ضمن مجلديه " رسائل العدل والتوحيد" في دار الشروق المصرية.
رجو أن لا أكون قد أطلت عليك، لكن هذه بعض الأفكار التي لاحت في فكري.
ولي مدونة باسم مدونة أهل العدل والتوحيد هذه عنوانها:
ProAhlulbayt1, "Certainly by the Lord they will not be considered as 'momins' unless they refer their disputes to you and you are not discontented with your decision and submit to you entirely" (Chapter 4 Annisa 59. Transaltiojn of the Holy Quran). Unless the people submit themselevs to the Imams(a.s)they cannot be considered momins,Because The Imam(a.s)Has the Samwe rights over The People as the Prophet Muhammad(sallallahu alayhi wa aalih) 049.014 YUSUFALI: The desert Arabs say, "We believe." Say, "Ye have no faith; but ye (only)say, 'We have submitted our wills to Allah,' For not yet has Faith entered your hearts. But if ye obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not belittle aught of your deeds: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
also the quran contains a Whole chapter about the Hypocrites.
Yet we See even your mujtahids say its okay to be married to a Hypocrite providedm theyre Kufr is not Apparent.
This is Abu Asiyah reach me at yahya1398@yahoo.com I found many of the comments interesting but I am muqallid of AshShafi'i fiqh and uphold Ash'ari aqeedah and don't disparage the differences of the Ahl-us-Sunnah imams as I find their differences to be acceptable in that they only differ in what has not been made decisevly clear in the Quran and the Sunnah. But I am interested in what has been transmitted authentically from Muhammad AnNafs AzZakkiyah and other prominent Imams of the Zaydi tradition who were contempories of Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, AshShafi'i, Ahmad, Layth Ibn Sad, Al Awzai, Sufyan Ath-Thawri, Jafar AsSadiq, Abdullah Mubarak,Abu Hasan Al-Ash'ari, Abu Mansur alMaturidi, Ghazzali and their companions. I think presenting their views of these various figures and these figures views of them would be rather interesting
You have only commented on one school of theology withing Ahle Sunnah which is Asharii. Ahle Sunnah also have another school of theology refereed to as Maturidi. Adl is concept within the Maturidi school of theology too.
ReplyDeletePlease refer to the following text.
http://www.ummah.net/Al_adaab/aqeedah/satisfying_the_need.html
It gives the view on the other theology school of Ahle Sunnah.
Also just to let you know the Mutazillis were also Hanafi in fiqh, though they were not Sunni.
Also here are some excellent link on these topics.
ReplyDeleteMutazilla
http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/13.htm
Ashari
http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/14.htm
Maturidi
http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/hmp/16.htm
Also refer to this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpuGv6l7eDE
Abu Bakr al-Jassas al-Hanafi's tafsir:
ReplyDeleteVision cannot be specifically implied from His statement: {Faces, on that Day, will be radiant, looking to their Lord} because “looking” has many possible meanings, such as anticipating a reward, which is narrated from a group of the salaf. Therefore, whenever that interpretation is permissible, objection to it by means of another interpretation which is not possible, is not permissible
Also regarding the hadiths that supposedly support the Vision, the same author said:
Regarding the narrations that are reported regarding the Vision, the intended meaning is knowledge, if [the reports] are indeed authentic. It is a sound knowledge in which there is no doubt. The use of “seeing” to mean “knowledge” is well known in the language
Thanks to everyone for their comments!
ReplyDeleteAs we mentioned in previous posts, it is important that we are clear and unambiguous regarding where we stand on issues.
By this we mean that during (and after) the time of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, the Muslim community was divided into many of the similar sects that we see today. This concept of a monolithic homogeneous "salaf" who were all uniform in belief and practice is wholly fictional. Many of the groups amongst the salaf were divided on some issues and one of the issues where there was clear distinction was regarding the position of the Progeny of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. There were the majority who held that the Progeny were to be respected but their virtue was not more than the Companions as a whole. You also had the adherents of the Prophetic Progeny who held to the exclusive virtue and leadership of the Muhammadan Descendants. Then you had those who manifested hatred towards the Progeny and manifested this openly. Each group knew where they stood. There was no blurring of the boundaries.
Those amongst the majority who supported the caliphate of Amir al-Mumineen, Ali bin Abi Talib, peace be upon him, did so not because they recognized his superior virtue over the other Companions but rather because he was the next best candidate. This means that their adherence to Ali was due to democratic election and not Prophetic selection or perceived exclusive virtue. Even with the election of his son al-Hassan, alayhi as salaam, afterwards, they didn't this due to exclusive devotion to the Prophetic Household. Otherwise, the election of and quietism towards the Umayyads never would have happened!
Therefore, to be a supporter of Ahl al-Bayt means that one believes and adheres to their exclusive leadership and virtue.
Similar is the case with the doctrines and creed that they taught.
This is because "respect" can only go so far. Singing of their virtues in our anasheed is one thing but seeing them as the primary sources of religious practice and belief is something else.
And Allah knows best!
Salam. May Allah bless you sister for your tireless efforts to write about Zaidiya, and Imam Rassi for your valuable contributions.
ReplyDeleteI would like to add two points:
1. As a follow up Imam Rassi, many Sunnis didnt think the first two khalifas were selected properly. Perhaps most interesting is Omar Al-Khattab's view that the election of Abu Bakr was a 'falta'(rushed and hasty decision) and if a similar means was used for selecting a khalifa he should be killed. Sahih al-Bukhari, 8:82:817
2. It is popular now among Muslims to say that lineage has no place in Islam. And while we all agree that what saves a person on the day of judgment is a sound heart (qalb saleem), not their bloodline, even in present Sunni fiqh lineage is very important.
a. For example, even TODAY, in all Madhabs of Sunni fiqh, you cannot give zakat to a Hashmi. You can give them gifts but they are not allowed to take from zakat. So for all sunnis who are fulfilling this pillar of Islam, they should realize this.
b. Even more interesting, it was ijma'a (by unanimous consensus) in Sunni fiqh that the Khalifah must be Quraishi. So the reality is that even sunnism emphasizes lineage when selecting a leader, the only real difference between Zaidi and Sunni in this matter is Zaidis say it must be from Ahl Bayt (i.e. descendant of Hasan or Husain) and Sunnis say must be from Quraish.
Again thank you,
ZB
To Pro Ahlul bait regarding Maturidi:
ReplyDeleteThe Maturidi school hovers indecisively somewhere between the Ash’ari view and the Mu’tazilah view. According to the Maturidi school, the Ash’ari school is “close to Jabr (determinism), indeed the essence of Jabr”. Maturidi’s doctrine is that “reward and punishment are according to the use (isti’mal) of the created act, not according to the principle of creation.”… “The power by which man performs a sinful act is essentially able to effect the act of obedience, since each part of the power is conjoined with each part of the act.”… “The creating is the act of God and consists in the originating of the power in man, but the use of the originated power is the act of man.”
Al Maturidi saw both sides of the argument – God’s Omnipotence and His Righteousness- and clung to both of them, but was not able to reconcile the two.
For me, the Mu’tazilah doctrine is decisive, clear and comprehensible. The Maturidi position is not.
Yes, I agree with you. Even the Maturidi school has its flaws. The Mutazilla and Zaydi do make more sense in this area. However, the concept of intercession of both Mutazilla and Zaydia is vague. The Zaydia quote Bukhari where the Prophet (pbuh) will save the ummah, but do not believe in the entire ahadith itself.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the Zaydia say if a person dies in sin and they don't repent they die as kaffir. So if I drank alcohol and a car hit me, I die as a kaffir. Whereas if that car didn't hit me I would have a chance to repent, and not die as a kaffir. Also once a person is in hell according to Zaydia they remain there forever.
I disagree with this!
With all due respect to ProAhlulBayt, I think you were terribly misinformed!
ReplyDeleteThe Zaydia do not say that a major sinner is a kafir. This is the position of the Kharijites. The Zaydi imams have always sought to distance themselves from this belief of the Kharijites! Even the earliest authorities maintain that the major sinners amongst the Muslims are NOT kuffar. Please refer to the translated 'Iqdu ath-Thamin on our sister site.
Regarding our belief concerning the Intercession, there is nothing vague about it. The major sinners amongst the ummah will not receive the intercession! It is not that the Zaydia believe in half of Bukhari's hadith, we simply reject any hadith that contradict clear, unambiguous verses of the Qur'an. It doesnt matter who reports the hadith. Therefore, the Sahiihs of al-Bukhari, Muslim, Muwatta, Bihar al-Anwar, etc. are not absolute authorities upon every Muslim. The ONLY authorities that the Prophet, peace be upon him and his progeny, himself appointed for the Ummah to follow was the Qur'an and the Prophetic Descendants. Since the doctrine of exiting the Hellfire contradicts both the Qur'an and the Ahl al-Bayt, we reject it.
Brother IR:
ReplyDeleteFrom your response I see a contradiction. I did mention the condition of a major sinner that doesn't repent before death.You say Zaydia does not believe major sinner are kaffirs. Then you say major sinner will not receive intercession. So if I die as a liar won't I be doomed for hell, since I didn't repent? I know for a fact that Ibn Hadid Al Mutazilli believed liars will go straight to hell. That is why his commentary is so highly trusted. It really shows how careful he was.
Brother ProAhlalBayt,
ReplyDeleteIm sorry but I dont see a contradiction. Because a major sinner who dies without repenting and goes to Hell forever, this doesn't mean that s/he is a kafir. It means that they are major sinners.
The Qur'an divides the two groups and makes it clear that amongst those who will dwell in Hell forever are the mushrikun AND major sinners. Allah says: {And those who do not invoke other gods with Allah; kill the soul that Allah has forbidden, except by right; and commit fornication. Whoever does such shall meet a punishment. The punishment shall be multiplied for him on the Day of Resurrection and he shall eternally abide therein, utterly debased} (Q. 25:68-69).
Furthermore, Imam at-Tabari narrated in his Tafsir on the authorities of numerous exegetes amongst the salaf that the verse: {Whoever earns evil and his sin has engulfed him—they are the companions of the Fire, therein to abide forever!} (Q. 2:81) means: "those who die on sin", "those who die without repenting", etc.
Brother IR:
ReplyDeleteGood Response! I will have to contact a scholar for this. Is there a concept of intercession in the Zaydia school ? Can the Prophet (sawas) and Imams (as) save anyone from entering Jahannum ?
Sallam to all . proAhlulbayt 1
DeleteI m not zaidia shia neither jafria shia . I m simply Muslim and sayyed , I m reading ur and other side response . honestly I opened holy Quran and on this matter these person are absolutely right . in Quran very clear stated " any one who enter in hell will live there for ever " even after reading Quranic verses if we go to scholor , its means we do not believe Quran we believe scholors . please do not mind instead going any where open this Allah book . all truth will be reveiled , inshahallah
Sallam to all . proAhlulbayt 1
DeleteI m not zaidia shia neither jafria shia . I m simply Muslim and sayyed , I m reading ur and other side response . honestly I opened holy Quran and on this matter these person are absolutely right . in Quran very clear stated " any one who enter in hell will live there for ever " even after reading Quranic verses if we go to scholor , its means we do not believe Quran we believe scholors . please do not mind instead going any where open this Allah book . all truth will be reveiled , inshahallah
salam
ReplyDeletei have been reading your articles. They seem to be good at the same time theirs a problem. The problem is that their are barely any books on the zaidi fiqh like barely anything. I would love to follow the zaidi fiqh because of the things i am hearing. Again we need to find the true zaidi fiqh books. And try to contact original zaidi scholars. I believe one of their scholars i believe his name is al houthi has been to iran before studied there and has brought some 12wers ruling and most of the zaidi tribes are starting kind of change their fiq and beliefs because of this man.Like honestly i have been on the search for the truth for atleast a year now and this zaidi madhab really is looking to be the truth with no weird fairytales and seems realistic. So if you can try to find some real info on them and find the authentic zaidis it would be cool.
Btw
My name syed mohammed akhtar..and im from canada
salaam brother, i know exactly what you mean, I feel the same way, that it's pragmatic and realistic without the fairy-tales. Did you know I have another blog where there are already some translations of parts of important Zaidi fiqh books. It's at www.zaydiyyah.wordpress.com
ReplyDeleteThe Imam Rassi Society is translating them bit by bit. The section on fasting is almost ready. There is a good booklet about the Zaidi tenets of faith (aqeedah) already translated there. If you speak Spanish, the Chilean brothers have just opened their new website: www.zaydi.org
They've translated entire books into Spanish! If you want to pray the Zaidi way, I have instructions on this blog, and it's quicker and easier than the Sunni way. (see June posts)
I'm going to do a post about the alHouthis soon. I haven't found any concrete evidence that they are promoting 12 imamerism yet. It could be a rumour started by the Yemeni government who want to crush them. I will find out for you. Happy Ramadan!
To Pro Ahlul bait:
ReplyDeleteI think the murjite position (that major sinners may still enter Paradise if Allah so wills) came about because of the political situation at the time of the Umayyads, and was promoted by the Umayyads because it suited them. They had earned the disrespect of the people through their massacre of Hussein and his followers at Karbala. Murjites advocated suspension of judgement, therefore would find no fault with Umayyad rule since judgement is the perogative of Allah.
salam
ReplyDeletesister zaida your the best. thanks alot may allah reward you for your research and Ramadan mubarak to you too...tc salam
To Pro Ahlul bait re your comment above:
ReplyDelete"Also just to let you know the Mutazillis were also Hanafi in fiqh, though they were not Sunni."
It's true that some scholars adopted the mu'tazili theology, and paired that with Hanafite law. From my point of view, if Abu Hanifa got the theology wrong (on important issues like metaphorical interpretation of the Hand of Allah, Murjism and Divine Justice), why should we believe his version of Islamic law is more accurate than Zaid bin Ali's? And if Abu Hanifa was Zaid's student, and there is a difference between then on law/rituals, shouldn't we go with the teacher rather than the student? Not to mention the fact that Zaid was Ahlul bait and Abu Hanifa was not even from Qr'aish. So, for me, better to be a true Zaidi than go half way.
Imam Abu Hanifa is an Imam of fiqh not an imam of theology. As for Sunnis on the school of theology are either Asharii or Maturidi.
ReplyDeleteAl Maturidi accepted Divine Justice, metaphorical interpretation etc..
Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) never pushed for imamate on this issue.
Next, about Imam Zayd ibn Ali (as) on laws and rituals, I don't want to accept a Madhab based on what's on the internet.
For example all 4 Sunni schools have been proven wrong in the area of divorce. Whereas the Zaydis and Jafari have been right in this area. Therefore, for this area, I have adopted their view. But again the person who gave me this information was a scholar who was well versed in ahadith narration.
All narrations have to authenticated. I've seen some non-scholarly Zaydis who blindly accept Nahj al-Balaghah as 100% authentic. Yet you will Ayatollah Fadlallah an 12r shia scholar admits its not all authentic.
To what extent is Nahj El-Balagha deemed authentic? Can we ascribe its contents to Imam Ali (a.s.)?
A: Not all what is stated in Nahj Al-Balagha can be ascribed to Imam Ali (a.s). Hence, every reference of every speech or word must be studied. Nahj Al-Balagha is also not written by Ashareif Ar-Radi and many religious scholars have talked about its references in more than one book.
Publish Date: 12/28/2006 1:59:09 PM
http://english.bayynat.org.lb/QA/qa.aspx?id=112
Remember the ruler Al Mansoor was a student of Wasil ibn Ata (ra). However, what happened to all these concept when he became a ruler? Likewise Mamoon Rashid was a knowledge scholar among the Abbasids, but he still remained a tyrant.
Alhamdulilah, there are a lot of English speaking Zaydis out there now as compared to 5 years ago. However, we still haven't reached to the stage of a finding an English speaking Zaydi who is an expert in the field of Ilm-e-rijal.
I know their main scholars are experts in this area, but again that knowledge has to be spread too.
Re: ProAhlulBayt's question regarding intercession, it is Zaydi belief that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, will intercede for the righteous of his ummah. This intercession would allow them to raise in their ranks and reward. One reason for this is so that they dont believe that it was their deeds that excelled them rather it was the intercession of the Rahmatul Alamin, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. Similar is the case with the intercession of the imams. However, the Prophet's intercession is an article of belief moreso than the imam's intercession.
ReplyDeleteAs we previously mentioned, if a person is destined for Jahannam, no intercession can be beneficial for them. As Allah says: {They will intercede for none except those who Allah is pleased with} If Allah is not pleased with disobedience, it thereby follows that they will not receive intercession.
Re: Mohammaed Akhtar from Canada, welcome akhi! We will try to assist you in anyway we can, inshaAllah. We are in the process of translating Zaydi books into English. Also, with the activity on this blog and others as well as the efforts of Zaidia, the Chilean brothers, Awsmakka, etc., there will be a Zaydi intellectual revolution soon, with the permission of Allah.
IRS
salam
ReplyDeletethank you imam rassi may allah reward you too. Inshallah everything will work out.
To Pro Ahlul Bait: Abu Hanifa has a book about theology (probably written down by his students), you can see its translation at this link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.islamfortoday.com/hanififiqh.htm
The translator translates "bi laa kaif" as "with no modality", I prefer "with no discussion" and that is what Abu Hanifa says about the Hand (and other attributes) of Allah. You know yourself, from the biography of Imam Zaid you sent me, that Zaid would explain to his followers what the Attributes of Allah meant in their different contexts in the Qur'an, as he was expert in the Arabic language and its deep, multi-layered meanings. I thought we had agreed above that al Maturidi did not accept Divine Justice, instead he wavered indecisively between it and the Kasb stance of Ash'ari.
As for the subjective study of ilm urrijal, I prefer to judge by Qur'anic principles, agreed upon historical events (like the tyrrany of the Ummayads), and reason/logic. How else can we ever know the relative truthfulness of various individuals living centuries ago?
Salaam
ReplyDeleteJust because Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) says Allah has a hand, it doesn't mean he interprets the verses of the Quran which mentions hands to be a physical attribute. This is shirk. In fact even the Ashariyah do not have this interpretation either.
In the book I gave you Imam Zayd ibn Ali (as) interprets the Quranic verses. Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) did not disagree with him on these interpretations. However, the disagreement occurs if Allah (swt) has a hand outside those verses. This hand again is not an atomic hand. It is a unique hand.
On the contrary, the Maturidi say Allah does not have a hand period.
On the opinion of Jabr and Qadr we have the opinion of Ahlul Bayt in our own books too.
Once a nomad came to Ali ibn abi Talib, inquiring about freewill and determinism?
Ali ibn abi Talib asked him to stand up then asked him to lift one leg, which he did, then asked him to lift the other one, which obviously he couldn't do. At this Juncture Ali Ibn abi Talib told him that this is how much freewill there is and this is how much determinism there is.
Also, Imam Jafar as Sadiq (as) replied to this by saying "Al amru bainal amrain" The answer lies in between the two.
This narrations are found in Sunni books.
Also, just because I am a Hanafi it doesn't mean I agree with everything Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) preached. As I stated before on the issue of divorce I agree with Imam Jafar (as) and Imam Zayd ibn Ali's (as)view.
Refer to this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmW3pBHrW_8
Ironically the Wahabi priest Ibn Taymiyya points this out.
I am not familiar with the Zaydi books on ilm-e-rijal. On top of that I have not yet seen an English speaking Zaydi speaker emphasizing much on them. If they do, then this will only benefit them against the wahabis and 12rs. The only way to defeat them is through this way.
Also, let me point out that Syed Ninowy is a scholar who is master in Sunni ilm-e-rijal. He also knows the ilm-e-rijal of the 12r and the Zaydis. In fact, the Zaydi imams Sheikh Muhammad bin Muhammad Ismail Al-Mansur and Sheikh Hamoud bin Abbas al-Moayyad are among his Shaykh. He has ijza from them.
Next let me also point out that Sayyidina Shaykh Ninowy has infact received some letters from some Zaydi scholars in Yeman asking for authorization in the Isnaad to the Musnad of Imam Zayd through Abu Khaled Amru bin Khaled Al-Wasiti (ra) who narrated it from Imam Zayd.
I’m finding it really hard to see where you’re coming from Pro Ahlul bait. On the one hand you’re supporting Imam Ali’s right to the Imamate and Imam Zaid as someone to be admired and followed; on the other hand you speak of yourself as a Hanafi (i.e. Sunni). Eventually you need to take a clear stand, even if it means compromising on some of your personal opinions. I really don’t see any point in inventing a new Sunni school of thought which is only millimeters away from Zaidism. It seems to me that some Sunnis are seeing the truth of Zaidism but are too afraid to admit it. So instead, they adopt 95% of Zaidism and still call themselves “ahlus sunna”. I suspect it’s because they are afraid of the negative repercussions they will suffer if they come out openly and call themselves Zaidis. I’m glad that I don’t find myself in that position; I find myself in a situation where I can simply be a Zaidi and be proud of it.
ReplyDeleteAs I stated before I would like to call myself Muslim before I call myself Sunni, Zaydi or Shia.
ReplyDeleteI remember years back when I used to debate with the 12rs they use to say we can bring proof from your own books. I replied back to them by saying if the truth exist in my own books what is the need to convert ? With the Zaydis and ProAhlulBayt Sunnis its a little harder to distinguish the difference. Just like how many people have trouble distinguishing a Pro Ali Mutazilla and Zaydi.
Also I would like to present Imam Shafi's poetry.
Allahuma Salle Wa Sallim Wa Baarik Alaihi Wa Alaihim Wa alal Maulas Sayyidil Imaami Hussaini nish Shaheedi Radi Allahu Ta'ala Anhu.
My heart sighed, for my innermost being was in dejection;
Sleep no longer came, and sleeplessness was bewildering.
O who shall be the bearer of a message from me to Husayn,
(Though the hearts and minds of some may disapprove!)
Slaughtered, though without sin himself,
His shirt as if dyed through with crimson.
Now the sword itself wails, and the spear shrieks,
And the horse which once only whinnied, laments.
The world quaked for the sake of the Family of Muhammad;
For their sake, the solid mountains might have melted away.
Heavenly bodies sunk, the stars trembled,
Oh veils were torn, and breasts were rent!
He who asks blessing for the one sent from the Tribe of Hashim,
But attacks his sons;truly, that is strange!
And if my sin is love of the Family of Muhammad:
Then that is a sin which I do not repent.
Imam Shafi'i (May Allah be pleased with him) said:
"They said, 'You are a Rafidi!', and I said, 'But no,
Nor is my religion nor are my beliefs of that kind ...
'But if love of the Prophetic Household be Rafidism,
Then I am the most Rafidi of the servants of God!"
Also look at the background of Imam Abu Hanifa (ra).
Abu Hanifa’s shaykhs were from different persuasions and disparate sects. They were not all fuqaha’ of the main sunni community and they were not only people of opinion. Some of them were hadith scholars and some taught the fiqh of the Qur’an and the knowledge of the great Qur’anic commentator, ‘Abdullah
ibn ‘Abbas. When he stayed in Makka for about six years, which is understood from some of the books we have cited, he must have studied with the Tabi‘un there who had learned the knowledge of Ibn ‘Abbas from him or from his students.
Many of those he sat with in Iraq were from among the sects of the Shi‘a with all their differences. They included the Kaysanites, the Zaydites, the Twelver Imams and the Isma‘ilis. Each had an effect on his thought, even if he did not follow their leanings except in respect of his love for the House of the Prophet. He took in all those disparate elements and assimilated them to reach his final conclusion. Abu Hanifa utilised all these elements, taking the best from them, and then produced a new way of thinking and an upright opinion. (Imam Abu Hanifa, Abu Zahra pg. 24)
أري أن حالة التشتت أو الرفض أو الخروج عن النسق العام الموجود هو بسبب منهج أهل السنة والجماعة سواء كانوا من ( الأشعرية أو أهل الأثر وأصحاب الحديث)، فكلاهما، هذان المنهجان مليئان بالجبر وأن أفعال الإنسان مكتوبه عليه سلفاً، وأن الله حدد واختار - وفق رؤيتهم – أهل الجنة من أهل النار منذ الأزل، وان كل شيء مكتوب، وأن العقل مرفوض ومهمش وليست له أي قيمة، وهو الضلال والإضلال والزندقة و...الخ من التعبيرات التي تُروج في محيطنا الديني والفكري والثقافي.
ReplyDelete- كما أن هذا المنهج السني والشيعي علي السواء مليء بالخرافات والأساطير والغيبيات التي تشل العقل المسلم ومن هذه الأمور – والتي يعتبرها منهج "المعتزلة" أهل العدل والتوحيد من الخرافات التي ما أنزل الله بها من سلطان ويتفق معنا في هذا الصدد الإخوة الإباظية: خرافة المهدي اللامنتظر – خرافة نزول عيسي عليه السلام الي الارض- خرافة المسيح الدجال، وخرافات كثير وردت في الأحاديث والروايات التي تنسب الي النبي زوراً وبهتاناً لتسوغ التجسيم والتنشبيه والمكان والجهة علي الله، هذا فضلا عن تبريرها للظلم والفقر والاستبداد والخنوع والخضوع - كل هذا - باسم الدين، وتحت ستار قال الله وقال رسوله، ودين الله ورسوله براء من كل هذا.
حالة التغلب التي انتصر فيها أهل السنة والجماعة علي من سواهم من المدارس الاسلامية - والتي كانت لها قراءة للنص مغايرة للقراءة السنية الأثرية- بقوة السلطان وبعقلية العوام، ساهمت في حالة الركود الفكري والديني بل وصلنا الي ال: تكرار وتكرار التكرار، وإعادة التكرار بصيغ واساليب مختلفة، وفقدان الإنتاج والإبداع ومحاولات كشف أبعاد جديدة للنص القرآني المتجاوز للزمان والمكان، فأصبحت أدواتنا المعرفية (وفق الرتيب السني: القرآن، السنة، الإجماع) أو فق الترتيب الشيعي ( الإمام ، القرآن، السنة) بالية، وفاشلة، ولا تغني أو تسمن من جوع، بل لا تسد نهم عقول النبهاء من أبناء الأمة، بل أصبحت مفاهيم مثل: الضلال، الهدي، المشيئة، الإرادة الإنسانية، العدل الإلهي، العقل الإنساني،...مشوهه ومعبئة بدلالات قمعية وجبرية تحكم قبضتها علي الإنسان.
وقد كتب أحد الدكاترة مقالا مطولا يتحدث فيها عن الضرر الواقع علي العقل المسلم جراء الهيمنة الدينية لمذهب اهل السنة بشقيه (الاشعري، والاثري) وكانت المقالة بعنوان: لماذا مدرسة أهل العدل والتوحيد بالذات؟ للمفكر الإسلامي د.محمد عماره، كانت ضمن مجلديه " رسائل العدل والتوحيد" في دار الشروق المصرية.
رجو أن لا أكون قد أطلت عليك، لكن هذه بعض الأفكار التي لاحت في فكري.
ولي مدونة باسم مدونة أهل العدل والتوحيد هذه عنوانها:
http://mu3tazela.maktoobblog.com/
ولي مدونة باسم مدونة أهل العدل والتوحيد هذه عنوانها:
ReplyDeletehttp://mu3tazela.maktoobblog.com/
ProAhlulbayt1, "Certainly by the Lord they will not be considered as 'momins' unless they refer their disputes to you and you are not discontented with your decision and submit to you entirely" (Chapter 4 Annisa 59. Transaltiojn of the Holy Quran).
ReplyDeleteUnless the people submit themselevs to the Imams(a.s)they cannot be considered momins,Because The Imam(a.s)Has the Samwe rights over The People as the Prophet Muhammad(sallallahu alayhi wa aalih)
049.014
YUSUFALI: The desert Arabs say, "We believe." Say, "Ye have no faith; but ye (only)say, 'We have submitted our wills to Allah,' For not yet has Faith entered your hearts. But if ye obey Allah and His Messenger, He will not belittle aught of your deeds: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
also the quran
contains a Whole chapter about the Hypocrites.
Yet we See even your mujtahids say its okay to be married to a Hypocrite providedm theyre Kufr is not Apparent.
This is Abu Asiyah reach me at yahya1398@yahoo.com
ReplyDeleteI found many of the comments interesting but I am muqallid of AshShafi'i fiqh and uphold Ash'ari aqeedah and don't disparage the differences of the Ahl-us-Sunnah imams as I find their differences to be acceptable in that they only differ in what has not been made decisevly clear in the Quran and the Sunnah. But I am interested in what has been transmitted authentically from Muhammad AnNafs AzZakkiyah and other prominent Imams of the Zaydi tradition who were contempories of Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, AshShafi'i, Ahmad, Layth Ibn Sad, Al Awzai, Sufyan Ath-Thawri, Jafar AsSadiq, Abdullah Mubarak,Abu Hasan Al-Ash'ari, Abu Mansur alMaturidi, Ghazzali and their companions. I think presenting their views of these various figures and these figures views of them would be rather interesting
Thanks for your comment/suggestion. I will copy it into the December edition of "Ask a Zaidi" where more people will be able to read it, jazaakallah
ReplyDeleteSalam Aleykoum All Muslims,
ReplyDeleteI have just one questions to my brothers and sisters. Do you know one person who is zaydi and speak a good french please.
Because I can read english and arabic but it is difficult for me to understand very well.
I love Ahl aul bayt i come from them but i born in france and we just have de 12 chiat in france, and i disagree with them.
Thank you for all and Salam Aleykoum wa Rahmatoullah wa Barakatouh.