Saturday, February 14, 2009

Shiites: Usooli or Akhbari - 4

Amir Moghul

Bewakoof Insaan!! there is only one Shia sect all over the globe ‘Mashallah’, there are no sects within Shia’s as your maligned self try to portray, literal meaning of the word ‘Shia’ is Friend so whoever is the friend of Ahlul-bait-e- Rasul saww, he is a Shia’, [Asef]

Muslims must denounce terrorists’ use of aggressive Quranic verses: Hindu forum 12 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com

'Tum Amir Moghul Bhi ho, Jamshed Basha Bhi ho, Chor bhi ho, Be-Iman bhi ho, Kahne ko to Musallmaan bhi ho, Per Ye to Bataao, Kya INSAAN bhi ho'? Ps: Dushmana-e-Ahlebait sirf Haiwaan ho sakte hain Insaan nahi!!!! [Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez]

Spiritual heritage of Imam Khomeini 09 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com

Amir Moghul sahab

aapko is baare me kya kahna hai? "Ayesha's entry onto the battlefield of Jamal was a violation of the Quran Allah (swt) states clearly with regards to the wives of Rasulullah (s):

"And stay quietly in your houses, and make not a dazzling display, like that of the former Times of Ignorance;...." Al-Quran 33:33 Comment Our contention is that Ayesha’s leaving her residence following the demise of the Holy Prophet [s] and accompanying into battle a rebellious male movement that opposed the Khalifa of the time, was an open violation of this verse. [fikarmand Musalman]
How ‘Pakistan’s Switzerland’ became Taliban land 02 Feb 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com

Dear Asef Sahab, Dear and Respected Ms Kaneez Sahiba and Mr Worried Muslim,

Answers as per my humble knowledge is as under:

Shias during the period of Jafar bin Baqir [May Allah have mercy on his soul]:

The period of Imam Jafar witnessed the completion and finalization of the process of transformation of Shia convictions. It was the era of total revolution as it had gripped almost every Shia within its tentacles. The revolution had set in after the martyrdom of Hadhrat Imam Hussain through the instrumentality of the Sabais of the Sabais who served as the revolutionary vanguard in completely brain-washing the Shias. The Sabais clinched their victory ninety years after the origin of their fake religion and sixty years after the martyrdom of Hadhrat Imam Hussain. They succeeded isolating and derailing a party of Muslims as far as the larger chunk of their faith was concerned and in attaching to it the permanent tag of and independent sect who had the audacity to impute their makeshift brand of religion to Hadhrat Ali and his children. It is strange and puzzling that inspite of the inherent disparities of a fundamental nature among the various sects of Shias, they have tried to trim down their amorphous in-consistencies to a tenuous consistency by making them spring from the personality of Hadhrat Ali and his progeny. But the apparently innocuous puzzle has been deliberately and pervesely engineered to pile up confusion on confusion and to make their religion look like and intricate puzzle. They provoked the Sabais to indulge in fissiparous practices, wage wars against the rulers and revolt against them by fanning the flames of sedition and murder. Their overt acts of rebellion presented only the tip of the ice-berg and did not include the covert conspiracies which they hatched to snuff out the unadulterated splendour of Islam. They also excluded their intellectual perversities which they had developed under the infectious impact of alien ideologies were spun out by the nations who had been vanquished by the Muslims and were smouldering under the wounds of disgrace and humiliation. The Jews were against the Muslims because they had received a severe battering a their hands. Besides, the remnants of ancients cultures and civilizations who took pride in their rapidly dwindling glory also threw in the towel to the Muslims. Therefore it was their dire need in order to disrupt the system of law and order and create a chaotic situation in the country. They wanted to patch up an articulate assembly of people to denigrate the entire administrative machinery, to oppose the beliefs and convictions held by the ruling class and to stigmatize the steps they took to glorify Islam. As a result of these visible and invisible conspiracies, Shiaism was cast into an absolutely novel mould. The Shias divorced themselves from the rulers and forged an identity of their own in the form of a permanent group which consciously cultivated and propagated a clash with the mores and priorities floated and sanctified by the ruling community. A tradition attributed to Imam Jafar is an endorsement of their perverse mode of speculation. He declared as part of their manifesto that the would adopt all the rules which were against the interests of the masses and discard all the regulations which served their interests. Somebody asked him: what would by you verdict if the rule is derived from Quarn and Sunnah by two Jurists: which of the two traditions would you accept if one is in favour of the masses and the other slashes with their interests?

Imam Jafa: It is better to adopt the rule that works against the interests of the masses

Questioner: What if both the traditions serve their interests?

Imam Jafar: When we’ll have to find out which way the masses, the rulers and teir judges are inclined so that we may discard it and act on the ther options.

When matters come to such a pass, the emergence of differences is inevitable. In these circumstances people can afford to discard Quarn and Sunnah but they can ill-afford to plug their rifts and cleavages. Since the Sabai views were self-concocted, they were not even remotely linked with Islam. But since these vies sprang from sources which prided in their direct affiliation with Hadhrat Ali, it was binding on them to acknowledge and practice these convictions. They also welcomed them for the reason that they clashed with the beliefs held by the common rut of people.

Now the Shias had shed away the mask of reserve and diplomacy, and emboldened by their numerical strength and the shot of new serum they had received into their silted veins, they came out with an unbridled expression of their real convictions. They no longer felt the strain of old constraints and they openly started recasting their beliefs in the light of Sabai views and ideas. Since they had completely gone off their rocker, they invented new problems and imputed them to their Imams to authenticate their spuriousness. They wanted to shape up a new religion with its own set of rules and regulations to draw it as far apart as possible from the religion introduced by the holy Prophet (peace be upon him). He had invited mankind to acknowledge the authenticity and divinity of his religion, which his companions had readily accepted as a token and proof of their unqualified faith in the personality of the Prophet (peace be upon him). They not only adopted it themselves but propagated its pure and all-embracing message among other people as well. It was part of their commitment to spread the golden words and sayings of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to the near and remote corners of the world. Shiaism was based on the statements and practices of the people and they never bothered about the fact whether these people had actually issued those statements and performed those acts which they had the impudence to attribute to them. For them the act of attribution is more important than the truthfulness of the attribution. They derive consolation from the presumption that the words and statements have been attributed to the Imams. They are simply swept away by the intensity of their self-generated rhetoric and do not worry about their compatibility or incompatibility with the emotional and psychic frame of the figures to which they ascribe these views. If they are inconsistent with the hallowed personalities of the Imams, they impute them to the inescapable necessity of dissimulation (Taqiyyah), and if they are in conflict with Quranic injunctions, they do not condemn their own views but blame them on the mutilated nature of the Quarn. They accuse the reporters of distortion and apostasy and affirm the unreliability of Quran and Sunnah. That is why the good people among them had warned the children of Hadhrat Ali that the people who did not tire of boasting their love for them, were in fact liars of the first water. A tradition is attributed to Jafar bin Baqir, the sixth innocent Imam of the Shia:

"Those who claim to love us are in fact our worst enemies"

He added: We, the Ahl-i-Bait, are the truth-tellers: But we are not immune against the liars who may attribute lies to us and pass on these lies to the people as authentic statements made by us. Through the utterance of these lies, they may suspend our credibility. The holy Prophet (peace be upon him) was the greatest among the truthtellers but Musailmah used to impute fake statement to him. After the Messenger of Allah Hadhrat Ali was the greatest truth-teller among human beings, but Abdullah bin Saba—may God curse him—imputed lies to him. Mukhtar was a source of constant torture for Abu Abdullah Hussain bin Ali. Then he mentioned Abu Abdullah Harith Shami and Banan and added that he placed many fibs at the door of Ali bin Hussain. Then he referred to Mughirah bin Said, Bazi, Sari, Abul Khatab, Momar, Bashar Ashari, Hamzah Yazidi and Saib Nahdi. They were among his friends and companions but the showered curses on them because they inputed lies to them. He added: We are not immune against liars. May God protect us against their evil and pack them off to hell.

It is attributed to his grandson Ali Radha who is the eighth innocent Imam in the eyes of the Shias. He said that Banan imputed lies to Ali bin Hussain, May God send him to hell! Mughirah bin Said imputed lies to Ibn Jafar: May God send him to hell! Muhammad bin Bashr imputed lies to Ibn Hassan Ali bin Musa Radhi: May God send him to hell! Abul Khatab imputed lies to Abu Abdullah: May God send him to hell! And Muhammad bin Farat is the one who imputes lies to me.

Abu Jafar Muhmmad Baqir is reported to have said: "May Allah curse Banan! He used to impute lies to my father. I affirm that my father was a pious man".

The Imams of the Ahl-i-Bait had probed into the real identity of these liars. They had served their links with them and pressed upon their followers to eschew their company and gatherings because they acted not only against the fundamental essence of Islam which condemns in the strongest terms all kinds of lying and backbiting. Kashi has reported from Jafar: once the name of Jafar bin Waqid came up before him during a chat. Abdul Khatab and a number of other friends were also mentioned. He used to visit him and he was the one who remarked about him "He is God on earth and in the skies and he is also the Imam". When Abu Jafar heard these words, he replied; "No, by God, it’s not true. From now onward you will never find me and him in the same place together. These people are even worse than Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians and disbelievers. By God! The glory of Allah has never diminished to the level to which they have tried to lower it. Referring to Hadhrat Uzair they claim that what the Jews expressed about him had penetrated down to his heart and God had deleted his name from the list of prophets. I swear if Christ had acknowledged and lapped the remarks of the Christians about him, God would have turned him into a deaf creature. Similarly if I had been swept off my feet by the over-flattering views of the Kufis about me, the earth would have squeezed me in its grasp. I am a creature and slave of God and I exercise no authority over the good and evil consequences of any act.

Muhammad bin Masud, Ali bin Muhammad, Muhammad bin Ahamd bin Yahya have reported through Muhammad bin Isa, Zikriyyah, Ibn Makan, Qasim Sairifi: I have heard Abu Abdullah saying that some people believe I am their Imam. By God! I ma not their Imam. May God curse them! Whenever I make a statement, they contradict me and put on it an entirely different complexion. I act as Imam only for the person who obeys me.

Inspite of all these reservations and qualifications, all the sincere efforts to pull the Shias out of their religions quamire did not materialize and the Shias moved up and up on the scale of conspiracies, mischiefs and revolts, because there was no dearth of liars in the era who, out of pretentious love, validated the bogus claims of Abu Khatab, Abu Basir Muradi, Zararah bin Ain, Javir Jafi, Mughirah bin Said, Hashamain and Abu Jarud. Therefore the Shias splintered into many groups on account of the irreconcilable diversity of their views and speculation and even exceeded the Sabis in the irrational extremism of their convictions. Some of them clung to the Sabai views like cheap gum and preferred conservatism to radicalism. A Shia historian has atteated to the intractable situation in these words:

Under the incogneial circumstance that marked the appearance of the Zaidiyyah sect, it was not possible for Imam Jafar Sadiq to carry out a disputation with them. He did not relish disputations and was scared. If the agents and spies of the kings of his era. They had spread their net all over the country. Inspite of his unpublicized movements, Mansur had somehow managed to make him attend his court. He said: God may kill me if I don’t kill you. Are you trying to create dissension in my country? Imam Sadiq replied: By God! I haven’t done any thing nor do I have such intentions. If you have received any news of this kind, it must have been communicated to you by a reporter.

People who initially differed with Imam Jafar and criticized him during his life have been pointed out by Nau Bakhti:

There is an other group of the companions of Abu Jafar Muhammad bin Ali who had acknowledged the Imamat of Abu Abdullah Jafar bin Muhammad and remained loyal to him throughout his life. But there were also a few among them who refused to acknowledge him Imamat. Their refusal was triggered by the fact that Imam Jafar had anticipated the Imamat of his son Ismail after him. But when he died during his life, they grew skeptical of his Imamat. They accused him of hoisting on them a pure fib. They bolstered their skepticism with the logic that he could not have articulated a lie if hi were a genuine Imam. In their eyes, the lie about his son had nulified his Imamt. The Imam does not tell lies nor does he utter anything that does not come pat to his utterance, that is, there is no incompatibility between articulation and action in the case of an Imam. His explanation to cover up the unfulfilled prediction further strengthened their suspicions. He explained that the unrealization of his Imamat was the result of some divine confusion which divested them to their faith in the omniscience of God and they openly denied the very concept of Bada’ and divine backtracking. To hold such views about the Lord was rather a disservice to divine over-lordship and instead they subscribed to the views of the Behtiyyah sect and adopted the beliefs of Sulaiman bin Hurair. On the concept of Bada’, Sulaiman had the opportunity to impress upon his followers that the Imams of the Rafidhis had invented a set of two beliefs to cover up their lies: One was the concept of Taqiyyah and the other was the concept of Bada. Both concepts were cleverly devised strategies to muzzle the truth permanently and to tantalize and puzzle their followers. Presumably, as these people suggested, the Imams were the victims of a feeling of insecurity. They felt that exposure of thuth would result in the loss of a large number of their followers and the fabrication of the twin lies helped them in keeping a tight grip over their gullible companions.

The notion of Baba’ was sparked by a feeling of self-aggrandizement. When the Imams elevated their knowledge to the level of Prophetic knowledge, they had to invent supporting evidence to justify the equation. The Imams claimed that they possessed knowledge about the coming events. When their predicions about the future came true, they at once took the credit and attributed the preknolwledge of the happenings to their special relationship with God, a status that was on par with that of the Prophets. But if the events did not follow the predicted course, they squirmed out of the embarrassing predicament by relegating the unexpected occurrence to predestination. Thus they explained them away through the concept of Bada’.

The concept of Taqiyyah is also the result of a similar dillay—dallying with religion and divine injuctions. When the Shias probed their Imams about with is lawful and what is forbidden in their religion, the Imams answered their questions to the best of their knowledge and ability. The Shias memorized all the answers and preserved them for furture reference. But the Imams themselves had not been dished out in the course of a single but spread over many years. Besides the contextual factors also varied. Thus the same question on different occasions elicited a contra-dictory response from these Imams; some times they issued identical explanations for different problems. When the Shias realized the pervasive contradiction and inconsistency in the explanations of the Imams, they had recourse to their Imams and asked them to throw some light on their explanatory ramblings. The Imamas wriggled out of an embarrassing situation by cashing in on the notion of Taqiyyah. And it was their privilege to answer them as they pleased because they knew best what was in store for them. They always kept their interests in view and the answers they designed for them actually catered to their interests and were motivated by the demands of expeidency. Whatever they did was in their interests and were motivated by the demands of expeidency. Whatever they did was in their interest and was motivated by the demands of expediency. Whatever they did was motivated by the demands of expediency. Whatever they did was in the interest of their survival, and the strategies they evolved to resist inimical forces were backed by the feeling of love and concern they had for their followers and admirers.

They played ball so cleverly and meticulously that it was virtually impossible for their Shias to sift truth from false-hood and to bring their erring Imams to account. On account of these camouflaged somer-saults one of the groups of Abu Jafar’s companions switched its loyalties to Sulaiman bin Jarir and discarded the Imamat of Jafar.

The claim of two persons during the period of Jafar

Two other members of the Ahl-i-Bait claimed Imamat during the period of Jafar. One of them was Abdullah bin Hassan bin Hassan bin Ali. His mother was Fatima bint Hussain bin Ali. He used to claim that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had engendered him twice. The Shia writer Asfahani is of the opinion that Abdullah bin Hassan was a Shaikh of Banu Hashim and held a distinguished position among his tri besmen. He was a paragon of virtue, knowledge and magnanimity.

The other claimant was Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan whose by-name was Nafs-i-Zakiyyah. Asfahani observes:

Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan was the most superior person among his Ahl-i-Bait. He was also the eldest among them. He enjoyed the highest status by virtue of his knowledge and memorization of Quran, his interpretation of religion, his bravery, generosity and the other positive virtues. On accont of his qualities of head and heart no one had any doubts about his being the Imam Mahdi. The rumor generally went the rounds among the masses that he was infact the (promised) Imam Mahdi. All members of the tribe took the oath of allegiance at his hand i.e., the children of Abi Talib, the children of Abbas and the other members of the tribe of Bani Hashim.

Kulaini in his book "Kafi" has also referred to the claim of these two persons during the period of Imam Jafar. He adds that they had also invited Jafar to acknowledge their Imamt. According to Kulaini, Abdullah bin Hassan called on Jafar bin Baqir and said to him:

"You know I am older that you in years. In your community there are people even older than me but God has invested you with exceptional status and prestige. I have come to you because I completely rely on your virtue. I know all of your followers will support me if you decide to extend your acknowledgement to me. And then not even a couple of persons, whether they are Quraishis or non-Quraishis, will dare oppose me. But he replied: you'll find the others more compliant then me. You should not except much from me, (mainly on two counts). First, I have plans to move into the jungle (to live like a recluse) and secondly I intned to to on the pilgrimage (Hajj) which involves tremendous labour and effort. Therefore you should go to someone else and place your demand before him. Don't tell any one about your visit to me. Abdullah said: the necks of the people are deflected towards you. If you accept my demand, no one else would dare oppose it. In this way you'll be spared the ordeal of war and nothing will be done that displease you or goes against your grain. Meanwhile a throng of people clustered round him and our dialogue was disrupted. But my father asked: what is it that you were saying. He replied: God willing, I'll see you tomorrow. He asked: Wouldn't we talk on the lines I like. He replied: yes, it will be conducted on the pattern you prefer. Abu Abdullah said: O my cousin! I seek God's protection and advise you to withdraw from your apparently intractable position. I apprehend danger for you. The dialogue continued between them until it assumed a form none of them had visualized before. He asked: On what basis Hadhrat Hussain had a better claim over Hadhrat Hassan? Imam Jafar replied: May God have mercy on Hadhrat Hassan and Hussain! Why have you skidded into a reference to them? I have raised this issue purposively. If Hadhrat Hussain had been just, the most becoming act on his part would have been to hand over Imamat to the eldest son of Hadhrat Hassan. On hearing this my father pulled at his shawl in a state of anger and stood up. Abu Abdullah also positioned himself behind him snappily and he said: Let me tell you that I heard from your uncle that you will fight with your brother. If you obey me, you'll reap a good reward. I swear by the most sacred Power who is the only and the real creator, who is benevolent and merciful, who is the most superior in the entire universe, I prefer to sacrifice myself and my children and the one in my family I love most over you. I perfer no one else over you. Therefore please don't let this enter your head that I am trying to deceive you. But inspite of hearing all this, my father left in a state of anger and sorrow.

Then Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Hassan came and informed that his father and uncles had been murdered (Abu Jafar has murdered them). Hassan bin Jafar, Taba Taba, Ali bin Ibrahim, Sulaiman bin Daud, bin Hassan and Abdullah bin Daud had escaped death. At this juncture Muhammad bin Abdullah appeared on the scene and invited people to pledge fealty to him. I was the third person to pledge at his hand. People huddled round him in innumerable clusters and took the oath of allegiance at his hand. No member of the Quraish tribe, whether he was a native or a refugee, had resisted the pledge at his hand. Isa bin Zaid bin Ali Hussain who was Muhammad's chief adviser and an officer in the armed forces advised him to send some of the people to his relatives to secure their pledge. He added: if you invite them mildly, they will not pledge at your hand. You should be a little harsh with them. (It would be better) if you hand over the matter to me. Muhammad replied: I delegate full power to you and you can do with them as you please.

He said: First send your men to the chief and eldest member i.e., Imam J'afar Sadiq. When you treat him harshly, people will understand that you will also treat them the way you have treated Abu Abdullah (Imam J'afar Sadiq). Musa said that after a while Muhammad and Isa called on the Imam and told him to swear allegiance to Muhammad. They explained: This will guarantee the security of your life. He addressed Muhammad in these words: Have you created a new prophethood after the death of the holy Prophet (peace be upon him)? He replied: I have not created a new prophethood but you will have to swear allegiance to protect your own life as well as the lives of your children, and you will also be spared the bother of fighting. Hadhrat J'afar explained. I don't want to fight anyone nor do I have the strength to fight. Whatever I had to say I have already conveyed to your father. I tried to scare him of the dangers that surround him but people in power do not scare easily. O my cousin! Pick up the young people for this purpose and leave out the elderly ones. Muhammad said: There is not much difference between you and me in terms of years. He repled: I expect nothing from you nor do I have any intention to fight with you. Actually I intend to leave the city and settle down in a jungle (to lead the life of a reculse) but I find it extremely burden-some to leave here. My family members repeatedly asked me to go out of this place in search of my livelihood but my old age is the real bottle-neck. For God's sake have pity on me! Leave me alone and spare me the torture of your excesses. Muhammad said: O Abu Abdullah! Mansur Daqanqi is dead (and now it is the period of my rule). He replied: What would you do with me even though he is dead? He said: I like to enchance your prestige. The Imam replied: But your intention will be frustrated. I sewar by God that Mansur Dawanqi is not dead. His death is like sleep i.e., the rumour of his death is a false rumour. Muhammad insisted: By God! you will have to pledge at my hand. It is up to you whether you do it willingly or by force. But no body will praise you if you do it under presure. When he forcefully refused (to take the oath of allegiance) he ordered him to be imprisoned. Isa bin Zaid explained: The prison cell is in disarray. We can't lock it properly. I fear he might run away from the prison house. On hearing this he burst into a laugh and said: do you really want to put me behind the bars? He replied: yes! I swear by the Power that conferred prophethood on Muhammad (peace be upon him) and blessed us with honour, I'll throw you into the jug and treat you harshly. Isa said: He may be imprisoned in Makhba'. At present it is the strongest prison house. He responded: what I utter at this moment will be confirmed:-

Isa bin Zaid growled: if you say a word now, I'll simply batter your mouth. Abu Abdullah said: I can imagine that you are looking for holes to hide yourself (in the war to be). You are not one of those who are missed and glorified by the future generation for performing feats of valour on the battlefield. You are such a lily-livered fellow that if someone just claps behind you, you will take to your heels like a fast-running camel. Muhammad felt cheesed off by his refusal. He had him imprisoned and left standing instructions that he should not be spared any torture. He retaliated: By God! I see you coming out of Siddah Ashj'a into the Batan valley and you have been attacked by a rider who carries a spear in his hand. He is half white and half black and is riding a horse with a white forehead. He will strike you with the spear but it will not harm you. Then you will strike the brain of the gorse with your spear andhe will crumble down on the ground. Then another man will attack you. He will emerge from the street of Al-i-abi Ammar Diilin. He will have two twined tresses and dense moustaches. By God! He will be your murderer. May God have no mercy on his rotten bones! Muhammad said: O Abu Abdullah! you have made an error of calculation. Then Saraqi bin Salakh Hant slapped on Abu Abdullah's back and locked him up in the cell, and confiscated his goods and the goods of his relatives who had not supported his rebellious act

These are the details of rift, cleavage and dissension which appeared among the Shias during the period of J'afar bin Baqir and split them into different groups and sects.

No comments: