The useless Imamah belief=250 years with alleged guides and 1100 with a mute one

[Ebn Hussein]

Ask yourself this question:

Shias say Allah is just and a just God doesn't let the final Prophet leave the world without a guide (a strawman argument, Muslims never claimed that he just left the world just like that, with no preparation whatsoever, in fact he did prepare his Sahabah with all the knowledge they need and was pleased with them before he passed away. I don't want to compared him to the accursed Khomeini, but ironically the Shias have no problem believing that Khomeini did not appoint a successor, they even narrate from him how he said that he is not worried about HIS students/sahabah, i.e. he trusts them even after his death with his sucession!). So according to their (in reality flawed) logic Allah that he must have sent infallible guides after the final Messenger. He (according to the Shia) did so by sending 12 infallible Imams (who are basically not just infallible like Prophets but actually SUPERIOUR than Prophets from all angles!) to MANKIND so that MANKIND can be lead by INFALLIBLE Imams instead of the likes of Abu Bakr (and Khamenei?) who are fallibles and bound to make mistakes and mislead the Ummah. Now here is the big flaw most people don't ponder upon:

All the 11 Imams put together lived for around 250 years. So Allah 'in his justice' has sent the last Ummah 12 so called infallible and absolutely needed guides (without them we would end up being self-flagellating, human worshipping, Ya Imam 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 etc. shouting ... ups) who all put together (excluding the 12th mute one) lived for around 250 years whereas the last one who is:

- mute
- inactive
- not ruling
- not fulfulling any condition and obligation of an Imam
- Not leading an army
- Not leading any prayer
- Not answering the queries of the Shias who pray to him (and throw letters in his well in Qom/Jamkaran like Jews!)

is allegedly living for over 1100 years now! Do you see the flaw by now? Let me break it down even more and illustrate it better:

11 infallible Imams (most of them couldn't guide but a bunch of people since they dwelled in their houses, did not Jihad or Hijra to other lands like the Sahabah) = Available to the Ummah for 250 years

The last infallible (12th) one =Unavailable for over 1100 years now

What point is there to send 11 out of 12 infallible guides during the time span of 250 years whereas the last one to this very day is living for more than 1100 years yet is not available to anyone, not even the Shia, despite their hallucinations and the hallucinations of many of their scholars who in order to fool the gullible Shia laymen claimed that the Mahdi read/approved Al-Kafi, helped Al-Mufid to finish one of his book etc. All these hallucinations are a farce because in the end of the day they themselves ended up following a bunch of Iranian Marja's who can't even recite a single verse of Al-Fatihah correctly. Is this supposed to be a superior and logical Madhab?! The irony is they reject the rule of the fallibles such as Abu Bakr and Omar and ended up with the (political or religious) fallible rule of the likes of Khomeini, Khamenei and Shirazi ...

[Ebn Hussein]

More food for thought:

Imagine, IF we accept that the 11 Imams guided (acc. to SHIA history they were house dwellers, constantly doing taqiyyah to the extent that they confused their own followers, including top students of the Imams who ended up so confused dying upon other Shia sects) the Ummah or were at least available (if they were requested) then at best we can say that:

Ali Ibn Abi Talib = was an infallible guide, ready and available to guide the Ummah (to self-flagellation, drawing effeminate portraits of himself and hanging them up in Mosques and newly invented Husseiniyyahs, calling upon himself, writing letters and throwing them in the well of Jamkaran/Qom (like Jews), batini/esoterical nonsense tafsir and other beautiful fruits of Twelver Shiism)

Al-Hassan Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib = was an infallible guide, ready and available to guide the Ummah ....

Al-Hussein Ibn Ali Ibn Abi Talib = was an infallible ...

Ali Ibn Al-Hussein (Zaynd Al-Abidin/Al-Sajjad) = was an infallible ...

Muhammad Ibn Ali (Al-Baqir) = was an infallible ...

Jaafar Ibn Muhammad (Al-Sadiq) = was an infallible ...

Musa Ibn Jaafar (Al-Kadhim) = was an infallible ...

Ali Ibn Musa (Al-Ridha) = was an infallible ...

Muhammad Ibn Ali (Al-Taqi/Al-Jawad) = was an infallible ...

Ali Ibn Muhammad (Al-Naqi/Al-Hadi) = was an infallible ...

Hassan Ibn Ali (Al-Askari) = was an infallible ...

... who all guided the Ummah.

So for the sake of argument let us agree that all of them were infallible and ruled and guided the Ummah. But for how long? Well, around 250 years, no more.

12th Imam: Over 1100 years and he did not rule, guide or advise anyone or anything with anything. There is no divine evidence for that, no hard facts no substantial evidence. Dreams of Ayatullats are not evidence in the Sharia, they are evidence in Shiism to fool the masses and keep them busy with the heretical belief and practice of Al-Intidhar (awaiting the Mahdi with loads of innovated Du'as and rituals that the Prophet never taught his Ummah. This is a Jewish tradition, Muslims believe in a saviour without the innovated Al-Intidhar belief and rituals).

[Ebn Hussein]

Shias say Allah is just and a just God doesn't let the final Prophet leave the world without a guide (a strawman argument, Muslims never claimed that he just left the world just like that, with no preparation whatsoever, in fact he did prepare his Sahabah with all the knowledge they need and was pleased with them before he passed away. I don't want to compared him to the accursed Khomeini, but ironically the Shias have no problem believing that Khomeini did not appoint a successor, they even narrate from him how he said that he is not worried about HIS students/sahabah, i.e. he trusts them even after his death with his sucession!).

What was Haram for Abu Bakr and Omar and the rest of the Sahaba (i.e. the Shura) was Halal for a bunch of Iranian Majoosis who deemed the Shura system so reliable that they elected (!) fallible men to rule over the nation of the Rafidah who claim to be in a better position than Sunnis since they have "infallible" Imams who guide them, not fallible Caliphs like the poor Sunnis. Problem is: Even the Shia Ayatullats know how illogical and useless the Imamah concept is, so they upgraded it with the Wilayat Al-Faqih system and the dumb Shias still believe in their religion and many in their state, although they are not being guided by any infallible entity, it's just that the cheeky Ayatullats claimed that the supreme leader of Iran is the deputy of the 12th infallible Imam. You can send letters to his mailbox in Qom, like a real Sabaite Yahoodi, until he pops out ... until then, the Ayatullats will rule over you and hypnotise you will Wilayah/Ghadir/Ya Ali and other slogans. 

(posts taken from my own thread, a must-read I believe, may Allah increase us in knowledge: http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/how-could-the-prophet-(saws)-not-appoint-a-successor-best-refutations/ )

Here the video:

Anyways, he says that Khomeini himself did NOT appoint an successor!

-  Now Al-Haydari directs all the questions that Shias normally direct to Sunnis to his students, asking them if they (Shias) can now accuse Khomeini of acting irrational, not caring about the revolution etc.

- Al-Haydari provides the answer that every Shia who defends Khomeini will bring and says that of course we (the Shia) will argue that Khomeini did not act irrational nor wasn't he careless about the revolution when he did NOT appoint a successor, rather the people SURROUNDING him (i.e. HIS Sahabah/companions) were people whom he trusted i.e. he KNEW that they will appoint a SUCCESSOR after him and this what actually happened (i.e. Khomeini's followers did not fall into chaos, rather they were UNITED upon one leader just like the Sahaba under Abu Bakr!)

- At 4:50 he does a bit of a mocking advising his Shias not to be to sure about their apparently strong and logical argument ("How can the Prophet leave the world without a successor") cause as Al-Haydari has proven, it is anything but an invincible argument.

- Finally he says that the Sunni will basically refute you (Shia) by saying that all your (Shia) argument is based on a false premise i.e. that the Sahaba in general (except a tiny number) are not just untrustworthy (ghayr 3udool) but in fact Murtaddeen (apostates) so based on this false premises your Shia house has been built. As for the reality, then we the Sunnis have evidence that the Sahaba (despite not being infallible of course) were still generally trustworthy i.e. the Prophet (SAWS) trusted them just as your Khomeini trusted HIS close companions (Khamenei, Rafsanjani etc.). The Sunni (Al-Haydari says) will argue that the close companions of the Prophet were not just some random people but his close students, with some he spent more than 20 years with, raised them, nutured them, advised them etc.

- He brings a final quote from Khomeini that despite NOT having selected a successor (in the age of Television back in his time where nobody could doubt his message!) Khomeini was very much relaxed, certain and confident in the last stage of his life, this is illustrated by Khomeini's famous statement in his WASIYYAH (testament!) when he said:

ا دلی آرام و قلبی مطمئن و روحی شاد و ضمیری امیدوار به فضل خدا ازخدمت خواهران و برادران مرخص ، و به سوی جایگاه ابدی سفر می كنم

With a peaceful mind, a certain heart, a happy spirit, and a conscience hopeful for God's mercy, I take my leave of all brothers and sisters to journey to the eternal abode.

Source: Last Will and Testamant of Imam Khomeini: http://www.erfan.ir/article/article.php?id=16171

Lastly he goes on challenging Shia scholars to address this "conflict" and objection of Sunnis (probably he will come up with some mumbo jumbo falsafah himself in the near future, after all the Majoos of Iran are feeding him and you don't bite the hand that ...)

I believe their Safawi revolution is one of the biggest Hujjah AGAINST the Rafidah in modern times. I mean, it's like Allah wants to expose them to every human being who possesses a working brain. I am not shocked that Shias don't ponder too much about these contradictions and blatant hypocritical stances such as:

A Prophet NOT appointing a successor yet raising close companions for few decades, having full trust in them i.e. his Sahabah who selecting a caliph at Saqifah Bani Saa'idah and then the majority of the rest of the Ummah united the next day on the best man amongst them

= HARAAM in and by itself (rulers must always be appointed by Allah the Rafidah normally say!)

Khomeini NOT appointing a successor yet raising close students (companions) for a few decades, having full trust in them (bunch of Majoos of Iran who can't even pronounce Al-Fatihah and Al-Ikhlas with correct makhaarij) who then after his demise SELECTED Khomeini's successor at the "Assembly of Experts" (Majlis-E-Khobregan)

= Halal and Islamic


The audacity of the Rafidah has reached hights highter than the Tehran Milad tower, in fact it was from the Qadr of Allah that this Nifaq of them has been recorded for future generations so every man of intellect can see what sort of hypocrites they are (when Sunni Shura is to their advantage they use it)...

 look here, Rafidah playing the Saqifah Bani Saa'ida game ... SELECTING a successor for Khomeini who did NOT select a successor, leaving it to the EXPERTS at the Majles-e Khobregan or Majles-e Khebregan-e Rahbari‎, also translated as Council of Experts where Shia Mujtahids (Ayatullahs) are charged with electing and removing the Supreme Leader of Iran and supervising his activities.

There above you can see how the Majoos of Iran played the Saqifah game, selecting their leader, the MAJORITY (not all) selected Khamenei.

Kayhan newspaper title: "The spirit of Allah (Ruhullah) returned to Allah"



As we know "the spirit of Allah" did not appoint any successor, he just raised them, taught them etc. for decades ...



Newspaper title: "Khamenei registered himself as a canditate for the presidency" (he eventually became president before he was appointed as the "Rahbar/Wali Al-Faqih" of Iran and the Rafidah. Bilaa tashbih, I don't wanna compare this Mushrik to our beloved Ali (RA) but Ali himself was invited to ALL three so called "tyrannical" Shuras of the first three caliphs, and guess what, he participated in ALL of them (not exposing them but participating in selecting a leader which is kufr according to Shiism!):



Remember when Rawafidh desperately try to look for every Sahabi who did not give Bay3ah to Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq (as if the Caliphate is only valid if every single Muslim in the world give the Bay3ah!!!), the likes of Saad Ibn 'Ubada (who acc. to some scholars never give the Bay3ah!) or Ali Ibn Abi Talib (initially, all Sunnis know that he eventually gave Bay3ah, NOT for unity reason lies of the Rafidah but because Abu Bakr apologised and explained why he rushed to Saqifah and did not consult Ali and other Sahaba. Ali was PLEASED and gave Bay3ah like a real man, no Taqiyyah), well, look here a newspaper from the time when Khamenei was elected, it says that the MARAJI' (Grand Ayatullahs) of Iran gave their pledge of allegiance and said that Khamenei's rulership is VALID and must be obeyed!

I am pretty sure there were THOUSANDS of Iranians who were not ready to give the pledge and even some MUJTAHIDS (like Ayatullah Montazeri who is the mind behind the Wilayat Al-Faqih concept and not Khomeini!):

[Ebn Hussein]

Hilarious but at the same time on point words of Shaykh Al-Islam regarding the farce of Imamat (and the useless non-guiding 12th Imam). It's his comment on a famous hadith that Shias misuse to somehow justify their belief in 12 specific men who are superior than Prophets:

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

“Whoever thinks that these twelve are the ones who the Raafidis believe are their imams is utterly ignorant, for none of them carried a sword except ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib. All the rest of the imams, apart from ‘Ali, never carried a sword, especially the Awaited One (al-Muntazar – the last imam). Rather he, according to those who believe in his imamate, is either scared and helpless or on the run, hiding for more than four hundred years.

This hidden one never guided anyone who had gone astray, he never enjoined any good, forbade any evil or supported any oppressed person; he never gave a fatwa concerning any issue, he never gave a ruling and it is not known that he even existed at all!

What benefit did he offer, even if he did exist, let alone Islam prevailing because of him?

Moreover, the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) stated that Islam would remain strong and this ummah would remain in good shape until there had been twelve caliphs. If what is meant thereby is these twelve imams, the last of whom is al-Muntazar, who supposedly exists now, until he appears to them, as they believe, then Islam should still have been strong during the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid periods, and it should have prevailed when the disbelievers emerged in the East and the West (i.e., the Mongols and the Crusaders) and did what they did to the Muslims, which would take too long to describe here. Islam should have been still prevailing until today, and this is something other than what the hadeeth indicates.

Moreover, Islam – according to the Imami Shi‘ah – is what they are following, and they are the most humiliated sect of the ummah. There are no followers of whims and desires who are more lowly than the Raafidis; no group is more concealing of their beliefs than them or more assidious in practicing taqiyyah (dissimulation). They claim to be followers of the twelve imams, yet they are the most humiliated. What support of Islam was achieved by these twelve, as they claim? Many of the Jews, when they became Muslim, became Shi‘ah, because they read in the Torah mention of twelve, so they think that these are the ones. But that is not the case; rather these twelve (in the hadeeth) are the men of Quraysh who took positions of leadership and caliphate in the ummah; at their time Islam was strong, and this is well known. End quote.

Minhaaj as-Sunnah, 8/173-174