Ahlul Taqqiyah wal Jahillayah

[fgss]

Assalamo Alaikum,

Yesterday I was googling about taqqiya and I found this. They are living a life of jahilliyah, forget about the death. How can they believe like this. And on other hand they attribute supernatural powers to them. Its seriously beyond repair.

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235011909-imams-as-in-taqiyya/


QUESTION WAS, from a veteran member.

From time to time on Sunni forums I come across the response that our Imams (as) did/said/acted certain ways on certain topics due to them being in taqiyyah.

Is this true?

I've always been taught/read that Imams (as) stood firm even in the face of peril and never bent their ways into taqiyah for the sake of having the truth spread to their followers. Why would they have been imprisoned and eventually martyred if they had the option of taqiyah to use?

Its something I see all the time on Sunni forums/websites.

AND THIS WAS THE ANSWER

A lot of people who lived in our Imams (as) times except for their Shia did not actually know about their status and public ally displaying it to everyone was not going to be a smart idea. Imagine an Imam claiming what we claim now in public and people supporting him. You think everyone would be cool to know that the first 3 were thieves and that the Khalifa belongs to Ale Muhammad (as)? The Abbasids and Bani Umayyah would of been pretty pissed to say the least. There would be a civil war.

Yes, they used to Taqiyyah. For Example, if someone came to Imam as-Saddiq (as) and asked him a question, if he was a Shia he would give him his (as) verdict or fatwa. If he was from the non-Imami's he would give him his (as) and all the fatwas and opinion of scholars or people of that area and let them decide for themselves. However, if an opponent, a person know for his opposition and hatred for the Shia came to him he would give him his sects opinion and not give his (as). The Imams were happy just to see the people praying, giving them more than what they could handle wouldn't be the best thing to do and as a result it would put the Shia's lives in danger.

There is a hadith where one of the Imams got angry at one of his Shia who said Salaam to him in public. I cannot recall which Imam it was but that goes to show what type of Taqiyyah they were using. He didn't want the people to see that this man was actually an associate of the Imam. It was safer for them to pretend they didn't know the Imams. Our Imams (as) were extremely cleve and this type of Taqiyyah worked. To this day Sunni's still think the Imams (as) were from Ahlul-Sunnah and we 'made up' shi'ism.



ONE MORE QUESTION:

    If they do taqiyya, how can they be relied on for us to take our religion from?

AND THE ANSWER IS:

You have to understand the context of it all.

They did Taqiyyah as an exception. It wasn't 24/7. Some Imams did things and acted differently to others depending on the situation they lived in.

We can rely on them because of the knowledge they taught to their Shia and the narrations we have now. Scholars are able to distinguish which narrations were said in Taqiyyah and which were not, majority of the time. For example one man who worked for the Abbasids became an Imāmi and sent a letter to ask Imam al-Kadhim (as) how to pray and the Imam responded in a letter but in the letter the Imam said to wash his feet and not wipe. So when the man went to do wudhu he opened the letter and was confused as he was sure he and to wipe and do it slightly differently, that's why he asked the Imam. But whilst he was washing his feet people who worked for the Abbasids were watching him as he had been seen associating with people who were Shia so they thought he may have become a Shia but when the man performed wudhu he obeyed what rhe Imam said and washed his feet, thus the mans job and life was safe because of Taqiyyah of the Imam (as).

When you understand this you will appreciate the Imams and their Imamah a lot more, trust me

Everyone is under the assumption that the Imams were vocal about their rights. This isn't necessarily the case. If some speaks out against the government now and starts claiming things, what happens? They and those who support them are silenced. This is nowadays, imagine 1400 years living under the Ummayads and Abbasids. The Imams (as) were strategic and opted to protect themselves and their Shia.

[fgss]

Some more posts.

Yes, absolutely, the Imams (as) used taqiyyah a lot. There is even a hadith where Imam Al-Sadiq (as) is approached by two men who ask him if he is an Imam who should be followed, and Imam Al-Sadiq (as) responds by saying no. That's obviously taqiyyah.

Here is an authentic hadith about taqiyyah:

Imam Al-Baqr (as) said: "Taqiyyah is from my religion and the religion of my fathers; whoever does not have Taqiyyah does not have iman.” (Al-Kafi, Chapter Taqiyyah, Vol. 2, p.219)

This is proof that taqiyyah is a must for us Shiah.

which means that those shias who are not doing taqqiyah today have no Iman.

[fgss]

And a final one. This is how they recognize their divinely appointed Imam.

Here is one of the stories of the Shias trying to figure out who the Imam is after Imam Jafar Sadiqs death.

      Quote

    “Come in, may God have mercy on you.” I went in. There was Abu al-Hasan Musa, peace be on him. He spoke to me before ( I could speak):

    “To me, to me; not to the Murji’ites, nor to the Qadarites, nor to the Mutazilites, nor to the Zaydites.”

    “May I be your ransom,” I replied, “your father has gone.”

    “Yes,” he answered. “He has left through death,” I said.

    “Yes,” he retorted.

    “Then who is in charge of the people after him?” I asked.

    “If God wills, He will guide you to that man,” he answered.

    “May I be your ransom,” I said, “your brother Abd Allah claims that he is the Imam after his father.”

    “Abd Allah intends that God should not be worshiped (properly),” he declared.

    “May I be your ransom, who is in charge of us after him?” I asked (again).

    “If God wills, He will guide you to that man,” he repeated.

    “May I be your ransom, are you him?” I questioned.

    “I am not saying that,” he replied.

    I thought to myself that I had not used the correct method of questioning. So I said to him: “May I be your ransom, do you have an Imam over you?”

    “No,” he replied. Something came to me which only God knew with regard to honouring and showing respect (to Musa). So I said to him:

    “May I be your ransom, may I question you like I used to question your father?”

    “Question,” he said. “You will be informed but do not spread (the answer) around. For if you do spread it around, then slaughter will take place.” I questioned him. Indeed he was like a sea (of knowledge) which could not be exhausted.

    I said to him: “May I be your ransom, the Shia of your father is lost (without a leader). May I put this matter to them and summon them (to follow) you? For you have taken (a promise of) secrecy from me.”

    “Tell those of them whose righteousness you are familiar with,” he said,“but take (a promise of) secrecy from them. For if it gets spread around, there will be slaughter,” and he pointed to his neck with his hand. I left him and met Abu Jafar al-Ahwal.

    “What happened to you?” he asked.

    “Guidance,’ I said and I told him the story.

[Rationalist]

Here are some more hadith I would like to contribute.

Imam al-Sadiq (as) said (about Abu bakr and Umar): “They are two Imams Adel (Just) and Qasit (Balanced), they were upon the right, and died upon it, so may Allah’s mercy be upon them on the Day of Judgment.”

Here is the full text:
كتاب نفحات اللاهوت : نقلا من كتاب المثالب لابن شهرآشوب ، أن الصادق عليه السلام سئل عن أبي بكر وعمر ، فقال : كانا إمامين قاسطين عادلين ، كانا على الحق وماتا عليه ، فرحمة الله عليهما يوم القيامة ، فلما خلا المجلس ، قال له بعض أصحابه  : كيف قلت يا بن رسول الله ؟ ! . فقال : نعم ، أما قولي : كانا إمامين ، فهو مأخوذ من قوله تعالى : * ( وجعلناهم أئمة يدعون إلى النار ) *  ، وأما قولي قاسطين ، فهو من قوله تعالى : * ( وأما القاسطون فكانوا لجهنم حطبا ) *  ، وأما قولي عادلين ، فهو مأخوذ من قوله تعالى : * ( الذين كفروا بربهم يعدلون ) * ، وأما قولي كانا على الحق ، فالحق علي عليه السلام ، وقولي : ماتا عليه ، المراد أنه  لم يتوبا عن تظاهرهما عليه ، بل ماتا على ظلمهما إياه ، وأما قولي : فرحمة الله عليهما يوم القيامة ، فالمراد به أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ينتصف له منهما ، آخذا من قوله تعالى : * ( وما أرسلناك إلا رحمة للعالمين )

An opponent (Sunni) asked Imam Jaffar as-Sadiq and said: O Allah’s apostle son what do you say about Abu Bakr and Umar? He replied: They are two Imams Adel (Just) and Qasit (Balanced), they were upon the right, and died upon it, therefore may Allah’s mercy be upon them on the Day of Judgment. When the people left, a man from his retinue (Shia) said: O Allah’s apostle son I’m wondering from what you have said about Abu Bakr and Umar! He replied: yes they are two Imams calling for hellfire as Allah said And We made them Imams who call to the fire (28:41) The Qasit as Allah almighty said And as for those who are unjust (Qasit – in this context means unjust), they are firewood for hell (72:15) and the Adel that because they switched from the right as Allah almighty said Yet those who disbelieve ascribe (Ya`diloon) rivals unto their Lord (6:1). What I meant by this was that they were upon the right in that they seized the right of the Commander of Believers (Ali). What I meant by they died upon it that they died was on enmity without repentance. What I meant with mercy be upon them that the mercy is Allah’s apostle because he was a mercy to mankind and he will be a rival for them on the Day of Judgment.

Source: Bihaar al-Anwaar, Volume 30, Page 286, Hadith #150

Ahmad ibn Idris from Muhamad ibn 'Abdul-Jabbar from al-Hassan ibn 'Ali from Tha'alabah ibn Maymoun from Zurarah ibn A'ayun that he said: I asked Imam al-Baqir (as) a question so the Imam gave me the answer then another man came and asked the same question so the Imam gave him a different answer, then another one came and asked about it so the Imam gave him a completely different answer than both of us. when both men left I asked the Imam: "O son of Rassul Allah, two men from 'Iraq and from your Shia came to ask you but you gave each of them different answers." He replied: "O Zurarah, this is good for us so that we may remain safer because if you all agree on this then the people will believe in it and they would be guided to us but we will not remain for long."
Later I said to his son al-Sadiq (as): "Your Shia always walk away from you with different opinions and answers" so he gave me the same reply as his father.
source: al-Kafi 1/65.

al-Majlisi said: Muwaththaq like the Sahih.
al-Behbudi said: Sahih.
Ali ibn Ibrahim from his father from ibn abi Najran from 'Assim bin Humayd from Mansour ibn Hazim who said: I said to al-Sadiq (as): "What is the matter with you, I ask a question and you give me an answer then another man comes and asks it so you give him a completely different one?" The Imam replied: "we answer people in matters of addition and deletion." I said to him: "Then tell me about the companions of Rassul-Allah SAWS do they narrate truthful narrations or do they lie?" the Imam said: "They are truthful" I asked: "Why did they differ?" he replied: "Do you not know that a man used to come to Rassul-Allah SAWS and ask a question then he answers him but later he would answer to the same question differently because the Ahadith they abrogate each other."
source: al-Kafi 1/65.
al-Majlisi said: Hasan.

[MuslimAnswers]

^

From an Usool viewpoint, it seems obvious the Twelver Shias would in fact not ever know when the "Infallible Imam" is telling them the real truth and when he is faking it.

Saying that the true replies would be given to the Twelvers and not to the rest is only a circular argument with no logical merit- that is, any sect/religion can claim to be the truly saved group to whom the "Infallible" would exclusively give correct answers to the exclusion of others.

If anything, it would make a mockery of the institution of Prophethood and Messengership as well, since the claim is then that the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) may also have been lying and making up the Quran and the Sunnah all along, as there is no way distinguish true replies from misdirections exception through invalid circular self-reference.

[Hadrami]

the greatest guide towards misguidance for sure

[Hadrami]

^

From an Usool viewpoint, it seems obvious the Twelver Shias would in fact not ever know when the "Infallible Imam" is telling them the real truth and when he is faking it.

Saying that the true replies would be given to the Twelvers and not to the rest is only a circular argument with no logical merit- that is, any sect/religion can claim to be the truly saved group to whom the "Infallible" would exclusively give correct answers to the exclusion of others.

As you know we have authentic shia narration which confirm he also gave false replies to his own followers which made them confused and contradicted each other. In other words, the imam misguided some of his own followers