صفحة 1 من 1

Shaykh Mufid’s Shift of the Imami Shia View on Imam Zayd

مرسل: الجمعة نوفمبر 27, 2009 9:48 am
بواسطة Mystic
Shaykh Mufid’s Shift of the Imami Shia View on Imam Zayd bin Ali (as)

The 12rs Shias were the ones who deserted Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) for claiming caliphate and for refusing to insult the Sahaba. Even till this day you will find some Imamis who are proud of their forefathers desertion of Imam Zayd bin Ali’s (as) revolution. The Imami justify this action by claiming the caliphate is only limited to a douzen Imams. The Imami shia were confronted for their traitorous actions. However, answering ansaar an esteemed Imami website replied by explaining the creed of the Imami sect. They stated that to this make accusation [center]against them is a completely incorrect notion. If these individuals deemed Imam al Sadiq to be the Imam of the time why would they have then turned their back on the rightful Imam and turned to Zayd for guidance? In Shi'a fiqh the call for Jihad is a duty of the Imam of the time. Afriki himself admitted that the Shi'a deemed Imam al Sadiq to be the Imam. When the Imam had not given the call for Jihad, why would his followers entered into jihad under the leadership of another Imam? The ithna ashariyya shi'a were those that recognised the Imam al Sadiq from the point of the death of his father Imam Baqir . They never wavered away from him nor did they recognise the Imamate of Zayd bin 'Ali. Those that sided with Zayd may well have had sympathies with Ahl'ul bayt and a hatred of Banu Ummayya but the fact that they had recognised the Imamate of Zayd and entered his fold means that they were NOT those that today would be deemed as Shi'a Ithna Ashariyya[/center]

http://www.answering-ansar.org/answers/ ... ussain.pdf

Also, if we go across some classical references of the Imami Shias we attack the great Imams exalted status.

The above hadith from the 12r Shia book is strongly advising 12rs only look to the 12 Imams for guidance. Even if Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) can prove his great knowledge to them, they still have to refuse to listen to him. The Nisabiath of the 12rs goes so far that just to prove that Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) was not qualified to rule over the Muslims the 12rs allege that it is possible for the great imam to drink wine.
[center]Sa`id b. al-Mansur, one of the leaders of the Zaydiya circle, asked him:
"What is your opinion about nabidh, for I have seen Zayd
drinking it?" Al-Baqir replied: "I do not believe that Zayd
would drink it, but even if he did, he is neither a Prophet nor
a Trustee of a Prophet, only an ordinary person from the
Family of Muhammad, and he is sometimes right and
sometimes may commit an error." (Kashshi, Rijal, p.232)
In history 12rs Shia were under pressure for having a negative view about Imam Zayd bin Ali (as). Therefore, Shaykh Mufid decided to shift the Imami view on Imam Zayd bin Ali (as). He did by re-writing history. According to Shaykh Mufid “Zayd claimed imamate for himself "However his intention because he knew of the right of his brother,peace be on him, to the Imamate before him, and of his bequest of trusteeship (wasiyya) at his death to Abu 'Abd Allãh (i.e., Ja'far as-Sadiq), peace be on him." (al-Irshad, p. 404). Shaykh Mufid denied that Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) claimed Caliapate and also he managed to convert Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) into a 12r shias too.

Also, in order to strengthen the Imami shia argument the 12rs will provide other references like this.

حدثنا أبو الحسن محمد بن جعفر بن محمد التميمي المعروف بابن النجار النحوي الكوفي، عن محمد بن القاسم بن زكريا المحاربي، قال حدثني هشام بن يونس، قال حدثني القاسم بن خليفة، عن يحيى بن زيد قال: سألت ابى عليه السلام عن الائمة فقال: الائمة اثنا عشر، أربعة من الماضين وثمانية من الباقين. قلت: فسمهم يا أبه. فقال: أما الماضين فعلي بن ابى طالب والحسن والحسين وعلي بن الحسين، ومن الباقين أخي الباقر وجعفر [ الصادق ابنه وبعده موسى ابنه وبعده علي ابنه [ وبعده محمد ابنه ] وبعده علي ابنه وبعده الحسن ابنه وبعده المهدي. فقلت: يا أبه ألست منهم ؟ قال: لا ولكني من العترة. قلت: فمن أين عرفت أساميهم ؟ قال: عهد معهود عهده الينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

[center]Narrated Yahya ibn zaid (the son of zaid ibn ali (ra)) he said i asked my father (zaid ibn ali(ra))about the imams so he said: the imams are twelve : 4 amongst the precedents and 8 left so i said: name them oh father!so he saide the precedents are ali ibn abi talib and hasan and hussein and li ibn al-hussein and from the left my brother al-baqir and jafar al-sadiq his son and after him musa his son and then ali his son then muhammed his son then ali his son then hasan his son then al-mahdi(as) so i said(yahya ibn zaid talking) : arent you one of them , so zaid said: no but i'm from itrah , i said so how did you know their names , zaid said: this is a promise rasool allah (saww)told us about (kifayat al-athar)[/center]
Again the reference above is supposedly taken by a unknown shafi scholar. However, what important to note here is reference again dates to post Shaykh Mufid era. Abu 'Abdillah, Muhammad ibn Yusuf ash-Shafi'I Al Kanji died in 658 AH which is 200 years after Shaykh Mufid died.
Now with all these views mentioned, a person would be curious about how the 12rs today narrate the Seerah of Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) when they opposed him in the pre Mufid era. Today on youtube you will even start seeing some Imami scholar giving us the Seerah of Imam Zayd bin Ali (as). Here is an example below.

When one listens to these lectures they will be impress will details the Imami scholar is provide. However, even after listening to these lecture one must realize that the Imamis scholar will never highlight on the some important detials. They 12r Shias Scholars will never tell you the facts that it was the 12r shia who betrayed the Imam, Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) teachers were other alids such as Abdullah bin Hassan (as), and among his supporters was the great Hassani Syed Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). The first fact is obvious, but the other two facts still oppose the 12rs Shia beliefs. The 12r Imami Shia till this day oppose the views of Imam Abdullah ibn Hassan (as) and Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). Now for the Seerah of Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) it is important to note that Shaykh Mufid did not have any positive Imami sources to reply on. Therefore, Shaykh Mufid himself “tells us that his reports on Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) have been extracted from the book of Abu al-Faraj Isfahani, a Zaydi author who was his near-contemporary.” (Shaykh Mufid, Bayhom-Daou). So in the early stages it was admitted by 12r Shia that the information on Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) life was coming from non-Imami sources. However, overtime in Shaykh Mufid’s works, when he quotes” non-Imami reports as additional proof of authenticity, these reports have been subjected to Imami interpretations and supplemented with Imami material.(Mufid, Bayhom-Daou)
Now if anyone does their research then they show the Imami Shias are guilty of plagiarism. Anyway with the evolution of the Imami beliefs, in the past few days I have been doing extensive research of Shaykh Mufid. I began to also read his work Al Amali. To my surprise even though Shaykh Mufid shifted the Imami position on Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) there is still a report in his book which openly points out that the Calipate of Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) if successful would not be any different as to illegitimate rule of the Ummavi tyrants.

Below is a reference from Shaykh Mufid Book Al Amali.
Abu Ghalib Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Zarari reported to me from Abul Qasim, Hamid b. Ziyad, who reported from al-Hasan b. Muhammad, who reported from Muhammad b. al-Hasan b. Ziyad al-Attar, from his father al-Hasan b. Ziyad who said:
When Zaid b. Ali advanced upon Kufa, some reservation entered my mind about it. He says: Then I went to Makkah, and passed by Madinah to call upon Abu Abdillah, peace be upon him, who was then ill. I found him lying prone on his bed, with nothing left between his skin and the bones. I said: "I wish to assert before you my creed." He turned on his side, and looking at me, said: "O Hasan, I always thought that you did not need this anymore." Then he said: "Proceed." So I said: "I testify that there is no god but Allah, and I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah." He, peace be upon him, said: "The same with me, also." Then I said: "I confirm the truth of all that Muhammad b. Abdillah came with." He kept silent. Then I said: "And I testify that Ali is the Imam after the Prophet, and obedience to him is obligatory. Whoever doubts about him is gone astray, and whoever disputes his authority is an unbeliever." He kept silent. Then I said: "I testify that al-Hasan and al-Husain, peace be upon them, have the same position (as Ali)", and then I continued till I reached his name, and said: "And I testify that you are in the same position as al-Hasan and al-Husain and the Imams preceding you." He said: "Enough. You know exactly what you wish, you wish me to give my undertaking on this?" I said: "If you do so, then I will have fulfilled my desire." He said: "I give you my undertaking over it." I said: "May I be your ransom, I was worried about the uprising." He said: "Why?" I said: "Because if Zaid and his companions won the battle, then we would have been in the worst situation. And if Banu Umayya won, we would have been no better." He said: "Go, no harm will reach you from either." (Al Amali, Mufid).[/center]

With all the evidence gathered there is a still a form of Nisaibm and Rafidism left among the 12r Shias. This combination of Nisabiath and Rafidath is shown by their opposition to Imam Zayd bin Ali (as) claim for Calipate and through their manipulation of historical events which goes against the Imami creed.