Salaam
I have heard that Zaidia are close to Mutazillah in theology, and that both of these schools agree on the following
Adl,
At-Tawheed, As-Sifaat, Al-Wa'd, Al-Wa'id-
Can someone confirm this ?
Can Zaidis tell us how they differ from Mutazillah in theology ?
What is the zaidia opinion on Waasal ibn Ata' and Ubaid ibn Amr ?
Also what is the Zaidi opinion on Sunni schools of theology such as like Aashrii and Maturidi ?
Do Zaidis believe the Quran was created or uncreated
?What is the Zaidi opinion on Hasan Al Basri ?
How do Zaidia differ from Mutazillah in theology ?
salaamz!
Maybe this is a question for some of the more knowledgeable brothers! Insha-Allah, I'll try to answer what i can.
Zaydiyya are very close to Mu'taliza in theology. They do agree with them in the matters you mentioned. They also agree with them on the denial of the ru'yah of Allah and the creation of the Qur'an.
In regards to how they differ, I don't think that they differ much. Zaydiyya say that Imama is necessary and part of usul ad-Deen. Of course, they also say that the imam has to be a Fatimi sayyid. Maybe this is where zaydiyya differs with Mu'tazila.
The other schools of Islamic theology like the ash'aris and maturidis are considered in error when it comes to the matters where they differ with them. This also applies to Hasan al-Basri.
Regarding Wasl bin Ata, he is considered a student of Imam Zayd and other imams of Ahlul Bayt. I don't know about Ubaid. So the Mu'tazila are seen as an offshoot of Zaydiyya and not the other way around.
Hope this helps you!
Student
Maybe this is a question for some of the more knowledgeable brothers! Insha-Allah, I'll try to answer what i can.
Zaydiyya are very close to Mu'taliza in theology. They do agree with them in the matters you mentioned. They also agree with them on the denial of the ru'yah of Allah and the creation of the Qur'an.
In regards to how they differ, I don't think that they differ much. Zaydiyya say that Imama is necessary and part of usul ad-Deen. Of course, they also say that the imam has to be a Fatimi sayyid. Maybe this is where zaydiyya differs with Mu'tazila.
The other schools of Islamic theology like the ash'aris and maturidis are considered in error when it comes to the matters where they differ with them. This also applies to Hasan al-Basri.
Regarding Wasl bin Ata, he is considered a student of Imam Zayd and other imams of Ahlul Bayt. I don't know about Ubaid. So the Mu'tazila are seen as an offshoot of Zaydiyya and not the other way around.
Hope this helps you!
Student
Ok the mutazillah separated from Hassan al Basri (ra) because he differed from them when it came to the status of a Muslim committing a grave sin.
This was the first stage.
Wasaal bin Ata says a person who commits a grave sin is between a believer and a nonbeliever.
Hz Hassan al Basri (ra) later said a believers previous good deeds keep him to be a believer.
If the Zaidis are closer to Mutazillah then can you tell me what the Zaidia opinion on Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) is ?
As we know in history when Imam Ali (as) appointed Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra )
to be the governor of Basra and Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) as a result misused the Muslim treasury.
Then Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) fled to Mecca and told Imam Ali (as) the he is no longer with him.
In the end he betrayed Imam Ali (as).
If we use the Sunni schools of theology we can still say Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) made a mistake but he was still a great Muslim.
What is the conclusion that the Zaidia have given ? The Zaidia criticize Hz Uthmaan (ra) so do you have similar views for Abdullah bin Abbas (ra)
Also Hassan al Basri (ra) was a student of Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul Bayt too.
Also Imam Maturidi (ra) is a student of Imam Abu Hanifah (ra)
This was the first stage.
Wasaal bin Ata says a person who commits a grave sin is between a believer and a nonbeliever.
Hz Hassan al Basri (ra) later said a believers previous good deeds keep him to be a believer.
If the Zaidis are closer to Mutazillah then can you tell me what the Zaidia opinion on Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) is ?
As we know in history when Imam Ali (as) appointed Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra )
to be the governor of Basra and Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) as a result misused the Muslim treasury.
Then Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) fled to Mecca and told Imam Ali (as) the he is no longer with him.
In the end he betrayed Imam Ali (as).
If we use the Sunni schools of theology we can still say Abdullah ibn Abbas (ra) made a mistake but he was still a great Muslim.
What is the conclusion that the Zaidia have given ? The Zaidia criticize Hz Uthmaan (ra) so do you have similar views for Abdullah bin Abbas (ra)
Also Hassan al Basri (ra) was a student of Imam Ali (as) and the Ahlul Bayt too.
Also Imam Maturidi (ra) is a student of Imam Abu Hanifah (ra)
salaamz!
As you know, dear brother, the incident between Ali (as) and Abdullah bin al-Abbas is shrouded in mystery according to many historians.
However what the majority, if not all, of the historians record that there was a reconciliation between the two. This is evident by many factors:
1. Amirul Mumineen (as) did not replace Ibn Abbas as his governor in Basra until he died. Nor did he replace any of Ibn Abbass' deputies in Basra.
2. Al-Yaqoubi in his Tarikh reports that Ibn Abbas replaced the money he stole.
3. Ibn Abbas went to Kufa to console Ali (apparently after their conflict) after Muhammad bin Abi Bakr died.
4. Ibn Abbas faithfully served al-Hassan (as) after the death of his father.
So, there are various views concerning the conflict between Ali and Ibn Abbas and it depends on which historian's report you accept.
However, when it comes to any companion, the Zaydi view is that all of them are just (kulluhum uduul) except those who openly transgressed (ila man aba') and did not repent.
Regarding al-Hasan al-Basri being a student of Amirul Mumineen (as): Keep in mind that a person being one's student does not necessarily mean that they adhered to all of their teacher's doctrines; one notable example is Abu Hasan al-Ashari.
Al-Hasan al-Basri was known to be a pro-Uthmani and some of the Ahlul Bayt imams were critical of him.
Please forgive any errors on my part.
yours,
Student
As you know, dear brother, the incident between Ali (as) and Abdullah bin al-Abbas is shrouded in mystery according to many historians.
However what the majority, if not all, of the historians record that there was a reconciliation between the two. This is evident by many factors:
1. Amirul Mumineen (as) did not replace Ibn Abbas as his governor in Basra until he died. Nor did he replace any of Ibn Abbass' deputies in Basra.
2. Al-Yaqoubi in his Tarikh reports that Ibn Abbas replaced the money he stole.
3. Ibn Abbas went to Kufa to console Ali (apparently after their conflict) after Muhammad bin Abi Bakr died.
4. Ibn Abbas faithfully served al-Hassan (as) after the death of his father.
So, there are various views concerning the conflict between Ali and Ibn Abbas and it depends on which historian's report you accept.
However, when it comes to any companion, the Zaydi view is that all of them are just (kulluhum uduul) except those who openly transgressed (ila man aba') and did not repent.
Regarding al-Hasan al-Basri being a student of Amirul Mumineen (as): Keep in mind that a person being one's student does not necessarily mean that they adhered to all of their teacher's doctrines; one notable example is Abu Hasan al-Ashari.
Al-Hasan al-Basri was known to be a pro-Uthmani and some of the Ahlul Bayt imams were critical of him.
Please forgive any errors on my part.
yours,
Student
How would you justify Imam Muhammad al Baqir (as) decision against Imam Zaid bin Ali (as) to fight against tyrants ?
Imam Muhamamd al Baqir (as) warned Imam Zaid not to go fight because it would only result to his death.?
We know Imam Baqir (as) hated corruption just as much as Imam Zaid (as) , but how do Zaidia see Imam Baqir (as) ?
Also do Zaidia agree that Imam Baqir (as) and Imam Abdullah bin Hassan (as) were Imam Zaid's (as) teachers?
Imam Muhamamd al Baqir (as) warned Imam Zaid not to go fight because it would only result to his death.?
We know Imam Baqir (as) hated corruption just as much as Imam Zaid (as) , but how do Zaidia see Imam Baqir (as) ?
Also do Zaidia agree that Imam Baqir (as) and Imam Abdullah bin Hassan (as) were Imam Zaid's (as) teachers?
salaamz!
Oh yeah, there were some things that I forgot to mention about theology of the Zaydis:
Regarding the sifaat of Allah, the Mu'tazila say that the sifaat are separate from Allah, whereas the Zaydiyya say that thet are not separate from Allah.
Also, regarding Hasan al-Basri, as far as I know, he is respected as a righteous tabi'i.
Okay regarding Muhammad al-Baqir (as), he and Imam as-Sadiq (as) are considered the 1st category of imams. So, they are highly respected for their knowledge.
According to Zaydi historical sources, Imams al-Baqir and as-Sadiq recognized the imamate and superiority of Imam Zayd. There's even a quote from Imam al-Hadi (as) where Imam as-Sadiq is reported to have said to Yahya bin Zayd (as): “Verily, if I claimed that I was an Imām over you, I will be an idolater (mushrik)!”
It is also reported that Imam as-Sadiq wanted to go out and fight along with Imam Zayd (as) but Imam Zayd told him to stay with the deprived instead. So, if this is the case, then it is inconceivable that Imam al-Baqir or as-Sadiq advised him not to go. Otherwise, why would Imam as-Sadiq desire to go out and fight along with him if he knew that he would be killed?
Also, Imam as-Sadiq is recorded to have said regarding Imam Zayd: “I swear by Allah, Zayd went out [and fought] similar to the going out of Ali bin Abi Talib, al-Hasan, al-Hussein, and their martyred companions to Paradise. Their followers swayed, doubted them, went astray, and disbelieved in them.”
If Imam al-Baqir did advise against Imam Zayd going out to fight, it was probably because of the previous experiences of the Imams of Ahlul Bayt being betrayed by their followers (ex. Ali, al-Hasan, and al-Hussein) as evident from Imam as-Sadiq's statement above. However, 12ers say that this was because of ilm al-ghayb.
Imam Zayd learned from a host of authorities from the Ahlul Bayt which included his brother, father, uncles, and so forth.
Hope this helps you!
yours,
Student
Oh yeah, there were some things that I forgot to mention about theology of the Zaydis:
Regarding the sifaat of Allah, the Mu'tazila say that the sifaat are separate from Allah, whereas the Zaydiyya say that thet are not separate from Allah.
Also, regarding Hasan al-Basri, as far as I know, he is respected as a righteous tabi'i.
Okay regarding Muhammad al-Baqir (as), he and Imam as-Sadiq (as) are considered the 1st category of imams. So, they are highly respected for their knowledge.
According to Zaydi historical sources, Imams al-Baqir and as-Sadiq recognized the imamate and superiority of Imam Zayd. There's even a quote from Imam al-Hadi (as) where Imam as-Sadiq is reported to have said to Yahya bin Zayd (as): “Verily, if I claimed that I was an Imām over you, I will be an idolater (mushrik)!”
It is also reported that Imam as-Sadiq wanted to go out and fight along with Imam Zayd (as) but Imam Zayd told him to stay with the deprived instead. So, if this is the case, then it is inconceivable that Imam al-Baqir or as-Sadiq advised him not to go. Otherwise, why would Imam as-Sadiq desire to go out and fight along with him if he knew that he would be killed?
Also, Imam as-Sadiq is recorded to have said regarding Imam Zayd: “I swear by Allah, Zayd went out [and fought] similar to the going out of Ali bin Abi Talib, al-Hasan, al-Hussein, and their martyred companions to Paradise. Their followers swayed, doubted them, went astray, and disbelieved in them.”
If Imam al-Baqir did advise against Imam Zayd going out to fight, it was probably because of the previous experiences of the Imams of Ahlul Bayt being betrayed by their followers (ex. Ali, al-Hasan, and al-Hussein) as evident from Imam as-Sadiq's statement above. However, 12ers say that this was because of ilm al-ghayb.
Imam Zayd learned from a host of authorities from the Ahlul Bayt which included his brother, father, uncles, and so forth.
Hope this helps you!
yours,
Student