What's the Point of Prophethood When Imamate is Present ?

[Hani]

So tell me brother Hani, who is superior, Messenger or Prophet??? You believe that every Messenger is a Prophet but not every Prophet is a Messenger, is this what you believe in???

The four books were revealed on four Prophets; Daud, Eesa, Musa and Muhammad (pbut).  what is your opinion on them???

You clearly have no idea what your own sect believes, here let me give you a helping hand.

Shia leader al-Mufid says in “Awa’il al-Maqalat” pg.45:

[ 8- The difference between the Prophets and the Messengers (as):
The Imami (Shia) have consensus that every messenger is a prophet but not every prophet is a messenger, from the prophets of Allah are those who preserve/protect the religious laws passed down by the messengers, they are their successors in this matter. The religious law has only prohibited us from claiming prophet-hood for our Imams although the intellect does not prohibit this, because they(Imams) have acquired what we have mentioned for the prophets peace be upon them.]


Meaning they're the SAME, everything a Prophet has the Imam also has it.

[Hani]

Also what Sayyid Muhsin al-Khazazi says in "Bidayat al-Ma`arif al-Ilahiyyah" 1/213:

ثم إن الفرق بين النبي والرسول كما في تفسير الميزان هو أن النبي، هو الذي ببين للناس صلاح معاشهم ومعادهم من أصول الدين وفروعه، على ما اقتضته عناية الله من هداية الناس إلى سعادتهم، والرسول هو الحامل لرسالة خاصة مشتملة على إتمام الحجة، يستتبع مخالفته هلاكة أو عذابا أو نحو ذلك

[The difference between the prophet and the messenger as is written in Tafseer al-Mizan, is that a prophet is one who guides people to acquiring goodness in their worldly life and the after-life, he explains the fundamentals of religion and its branches as per-Allah's Will to guide people and bring them happiness, The messenger is the one carrying a special message to perfect the divine argument, whoever opposes (his message) will be punished and perish.]

[Ameen]

Bro I asked you what you believe in. I haven't got your point of view. Forget about what my Fiqah and sect thinks, what do you think??? What does yours think???

[Hani]

Review post #29.

[Ijtaba]

As-salaam o Alaikum.

Brother Hani has given correct definition of Messenger and Prophet which I as a Shia believe.

It is true that we shias believe our 12 Imams (a.s) to be superior than all Prophets and Messengers except Nabi Mohammed (s.a.w.w).

However I have some questions which I hope knowledgeable brothers over here could answer:

Q1. Is there any Shiite ahadith which says that Office of Imamate is Afhdal than Office of Prophethood and Office of Messengerhood? I am asking this question because whenever any Shia scholar is questioned about station of Imamate being afhdal than Nabuwat and Risalat the scholar answers by giving the Quranic verse referring to Imamate of Nabi Ibrahim (a.s) and then his opinions. The scholar does not answer backed by any ahadith of our Imams (a.s) saying that Imamate is a station superior than Nabuwat and Risalat.

02. Except for Imam Ali (a.s) and Imam Mehdi (a.s) [the reason given by shias is that Nabi Isa (a.s) would read Salah behind Imam Mehdi (a.s) so this makes Imam Mehdi (a.s) superior to Nabi Isa (a.s)] I have yet to see hadiths which state in-between Imams (a.s) superiority to Prophets and Messengers except Nabi Mohammed (s.a.w.w). So are there any Shiite hadiths which say Imam Hassan Mujtaba (a.s) to Imam Hassan Askari (a.s) are superior to Prophets and Messengers except Nabi Mohammed (s.a.w.w).

[Farid]

Wa alaykum alsalam wa rahmatullah,

I found an interesting chapter in Basa'ir Al Darajat by Al Saffar (d. 290) which is one of the earliest Shia books, that is called:

The Imams are Better than Musa and Al Khidr

The chapter contains five narrations. These narrations support the belief that Al Sadiq and Al Baqir had more knowledge than the prophets.

[Hani]

I think they have both, I recall reading some texts that imply that Imamah is a rank second only to prophet-hood, yet they also have tons of reports showing that the Imams are un-equaled in rank, piety, knowledge etc...

The Shia view that Imams are better than prophets is very problematic and corrupt, it can also be easily dis-proven with intellect but no need to get into it now.

As for the argument that `Isa (as) praying behind the Mahdi is evidence that the latter is greater, this is corrupt since our Prophet (saw) prayed behind `Abdu-Rahman ibn `Awf in one occasion and behind Abu Bakr at the end of his life. Notice the difference though, when the Prophet (saw) prayed behind those two men, he did so because he came late from his travels and he happened to come in a time when the people were praying, he would never allow anyone to lead besides himself when he was present and in good health. On the other hand, al-Mahdi who was present and healthy had offered `Isa (as) the choice of leading, knowing his status of prophet-hood, `Isa (as) only prays behind al-Mahdi out of respect for the nation of Muhammad (saw) and because it is the Sunnah of our Prophet (saw) that the people must pray behind the Caliph who they gave Bay`ah to, this was al-Mahdi at the time.

[Ijtaba]

Wa alaykum alsalam wa rahmatullah,

I found an interesting chapter in Basa'ir Al Darajat by Al Saffar (d. 290) which is one of the earliest Shia books, that is called:

The Imams are Better than Musa and Al Khidr

The chapter contains five narrations. These narrations support the belief that Al Sadiq and Al Baqir had more knowledge than the prophets.

Thank you brother for your answer. Can you verify the authenticity of these narrations? Also does being more knowledgeable imply superiority. I am asking this because it is natural for people to have knowledge about their time and history but as for future it is ilm e Ghaib. Therefore as Imams (a.s) were living in future time compared to Prophets (a.s) then for Imam what is history and known would be ilm e Ghaib for Prophet Musa (a.s) and Khidr (a.s) as for them that would be future events.

I think they have both, I recall reading some texts that imply that Imamah is a rank second only to prophet-hood, yet they also have tons of reports showing that the Imams are un-equaled in rank, piety, knowledge etc...

The Shia view that Imams are better than prophets is very problematic and corrupt, it can also be easily dis-proven with intellect but no need to get into it now.

As for the argument that `Isa (as) praying behind the Mahdi is evidence that the latter is greater, this is corrupt since our Prophet (saw) prayed behind `Abdu-Rahman ibn `Awf in one occasion and behind Abu Bakr at the end of his life. Notice the difference though, when the Prophet (saw) prayed behind those two men, he did so because he came late from his travels and he happened to come in a time when the people were praying, he would never allow anyone to lead besides himself when he was present and in good health. On the other hand, al-Mahdi who was present and healthy had offered `Isa (as) the choice of leading, knowing his status of prophet-hood, `Isa (as) only prays behind al-Mahdi out of respect for the nation of Muhammad (saw) and because it is the Sunnah of our Prophet (saw) that the people must pray behind the Caliph who they gave Bay`ah to, this was al-Mahdi at the time.

Brother Hani I also believe what you said above regarding praying behind someone does not make them superior to be true.

I believe we shias can't back Imamate being superior to Nabuwah by authentic Shiite hadiths. There maybe such hadiths but I have yet to see them. Whenever we are asked this question I see most scholars giving their own opinions instead of backing up by authentic hadiths.

I believe using Qur'anic verse (Imamate of Ibrahim a.s) to support superiority of Imamate over Prophethood is flawed reasoning. If we follow this logic then this would mean Kingship is superior to Prophethood as both Prophets Dawud (a.s) and Sulaiman (a.s) were already Prophets when they were made Kings. They were made Prophets first and Kings afterwards. So this does not mean Kingship is afdal than Nabuwah.

[Ibn Yahya]

Wa alaykum alsalam wa rahmatullah,

I found an interesting chapter in Basa'ir Al Darajat by Al Saffar (d. 290) which is one of the earliest Shia books, that is called:

The Imams are Better than Musa and Al Khidr

The chapter contains five narrations. These narrations support the belief that Al Sadiq and Al Baqir had more knowledge than the prophets.

In al-Kafi there's a narration that the Imams inherit all the knowledge of their predecessors. Which is silly then because that would mean that as-Sadiq is more knowledgable than the Prophet and 'Ali

[GreatChineseFall]

"When Abraham (as) was tried by his Lord and he succeeded then he was made an Imam of the people",

Now I am sure that you know what Abraham (as) was before he was put through a test, when he succeeded he was made an Imam. This means he wasn't one before. And he was only made an Imam after being tried and after succeeding.

Now ask yourself this with a wide mind and an open heart, was he promoted??? Was he demoted??? Or was he given a title/grade/status of a similar level/stage?

Technically, the answer to this doesn't matter for the question of superiority of an imam over a prophet. If he was demoted, it doesn't help you.
If we assume that there is such a station like imamate/imam (this is contested) and if we assume this ayah indicates a promotion ( also contested), then still it's not related to that question.

We might conclude that someone who is both a prophet and an imam has a higher status than someone who is just a prophet. We don't know anything about just an imam, which the thread was about.

Similarly when prophet Suleiman was made a king, we might conclude that someone who is both a prophet and a king has a higher status, we can't say that a king has a higher status than a prophet.

You can strengthen your opinion by showing that prophet Ibrahim stopped being a prophet when he became an imam.

As for what's the wisdom behind Imamate, I say what's the point of ending Prophet-hood if they are to be succeeded by "Imams" who are exactly like them heck even better!?

The usual response is that this is irrelevant as well, the wisdom behind it might be subtle, like why is there a gap between prophets and people are misguided?

A Prophets duty and job is to explain and clarify the measage, where as the Imams duty and job is to give further explanation and clarification.

Can you explain and clarify (further) what the difference is between explaining and clarifying and explaining and clarifying further?

As for the rest of the topic, the question of why something is as it is, is a hard one and you will get the same answer. To be fair, technically they have a point, not all reasons can be known. Positions should be rejected because of lack of proper evidence, not because of a lack of a valid reason

You can even question the entire idea of having a divine book as it serves no real purpose if you have continuously a divinely guided imam to refer to. A book can store information much longer than the lifetime of the messenger of that book which can be used to refer to as evidence at a later time. If you always have a guiding imam just ask him who can answer much more directly than a book.