TwelverShia.net Forum

Deviants amongst the 'Alids - A chronic of madmen who exploited their lineage

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ebn Hussein

salam 3ala man ittab3a al Huda,

As an Ex-Shiite myself I can fully emphasise with a certain doubt many Shiite hold, which is:

"How can the Ahl al-Bayt be wrong or at least not being superior (in knowledge) than others?"

People who have been raised with Ghuluww upon Ghuluww will have a hard time to accept that the historical version of the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt were anything but the Twelver Rafidis, i.e. The historical Imams learnt from the Sahabah, taught others, narrated from others (non-infallibles) etc. there are numerous narrations from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (Imam al-Sadiq etc.) praising Abu bakr and 'Omar and there is plenty evidence that the Imams never believed in the notion of "12 divinely appointed Imams being the heirs of the Sunnah only". Their narrations can be found in many books of the Sunnah (a shocking fact unknown to many Shias who think they own the Ahl al-Bayt with all the kufr they've ascribed to them):

https://youpuncturedtheark.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/narrations-from-ahl-albayt-present-in-books-the-main-books-of-ahlesunnah/

Yet, I'v personally encountered many Shias (inlcuding those who are on the brink of becoming Sunni) who simply can't grasp how the Ahl al-Bayt could possibily be less knowledgable than others, let alone deviant. They are the progeny of the Prophet (peace be upon him) after all, he taught 'Ali, 'Ali taught his children, his children taught their children. How can they possibily get anything wrong (let alone major issues), let alone fall into misguidance?

The first 'Alid Hashimite I'd like to present shall answer that question. He's not some random Fulanistani from Qom or Najaf claiming Prophet ancestry. In fact he is someone born in the household of an alleged infallible, raised and nurtured by him.

Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq

Muhammad ibn Ja'far al-Sadiq (son of al-Sadiq!), surnamed al-Dibaj ("the handsome") was the younger full brother of Musa al-Kadhim. He appeared in Mecca in the year 200 A.H. / 815 C.E. claiming that he was the Awaited Mahdi (a fetish of many heretical 'Alid). He believed in a Zaydi Shia type of Imamate (i.e. even most crazy Shias back then refrained to associate themselves with 12er Rafidism) and declared himself as the Caliph of the Muslims and took the oath of allegiance from them and was called the Leader of the faithful. Al-Dibaj died in 203 A.H. / 818 C.E.,[7] and was buried in Bastam, Iran (where many heretics from among the 'Alads fled to, especially Qom and Khorassan)

As natural with Shiism, an entire new sect emerged in the name of Muhammad al-Dibaj, namely the Shumaytiyya or Sumaytiyya. They believed that the Imamate would remain with his family and that the Mahdi would come from among his family.

A direct descendant of the Prophet, who was raised by Ja'far al-Sadiq's, yet he lost his mind and made up beliefs that are opposed by Sunnah and Rafidah alike. That's how crazy those early times where and how common it was (for many 'Alids) to make such ridiculous claims, claims that were never done by profounded scholars of the Ahl al-Bayt, like Ja'far al-Sadiq who neither claimed that he is the Mahdi, nor the son of the 11th Imam (who never had a son), nor that he or anybody else for that matter is a divinely guided Imam after the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Now this post is in no way intended to suggest that any of the 11 noble Imams (the 12th was never born) that the Rafidah attribute to themselves (whilst in reality they are free and innocent of them) were in one way or the other heretics, it just shows that even direct descendants of the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt, in the very early stages of Islam, came up with deviant beliefs (often one of them claiming to be the Mahdi, that was absolutely fashion back then to gather idiotic sheeps around oneself).

So what makes some people doubt that the alleged followers of the 11 Imams were not a billion time worse than their very own children?
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Ebn Hussein

The freak show continues as follow:

Abdallah ibn Mu'awiya

Abdallah ibn Mu'awiya was a descendant of Ja'far ibn Abi Talib. At the end of 127 AH / AD 744 Shias of Kufa (historical die hard heretics and betrayers) set up him as Imam. He revolted against Yazid III, the Umayyad Caliph, with the support of Shia's of Kufa and Ctesiphon (near Baghdad). He moved to west of Iran and Isfahan and Istakhr (where many heretics from among the Hashimites moved to). He managed to control the west of Iran for two years. Finally, he was defeated by the caliph armies in AD 746–7 and fled to Herat in Khurasan. He allegedly died imprisoned by Abu Muslim, his rival. His followers did not believe his death and said that he went to occultation and he would return as Mahdi.

الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Ebn Hussein

The righteous Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt, before anybody else, had to pay the price for the lunacies from among the 'Alid Hashimites and Rafidis who lied in their names. The likes of Imam Ali al-Hadi (al-Naqi), Imam Musa al-Kadhim etc. never (not even acc. to fabricated narration) expressed or taught Rafidi beliefs, yet they were viewed with suspicion (but so were other Imams, some even got nearly killed like Imam Ahmad for his brave stance), either due to the envity of the rulers (as people naturally prefered them over the 'Abbasids) or due to their fear that the these Imams will also start revolts against them just like the deviants amongst the 'Alid's did. Harun al-Rashid for example literally hunted the Rafidah for the kufr they had spread:

قال ابن حزم في جمهرة أنساب العرب (1/127) في ترجمة منصور الشاعر بن الزبرقان :-
وكان يظهر للرشيد الانحراف عن بني علي، إلى أن أنشده العتابي يوماً شعراً له في مذهب الرافضة، فحرد الرشيد، فكتب من وقته إلى صاحب خراسان يأمره بصلب منصور بعد قطع لسانه.

"[Harun] al-Rashid was made aware of the deviations (Inhirafat) of the 'Alids to the extent that one day al-'Attabi recited a poem to him about [the reality of] the madhab of the Rafidah. Upon that al-Rashid got upset and wrote straight away to the governor of Khorasan, ordering him to crucify Mansur*, after his tongue was cut in half."

*Mansur al-Sha'ir was a former Khariji who turned Rafidi

[By Ibn Hazm in his 'Jamharah Ansab al-'Arab' 1/127, bioghraphy of Mansur the poet son of al-Zabriqan]

He also said:
قال الخطيب البغدادي في شرف أصحاب الحديث5
قال هارون الرشيد طلبت أربعة فوجدتها في أربعة , طلبت الكفر فوجدته في الجهمية , وطلبت الكلام والشغب فوجدته في المعتزلة , وطلبت الكذب فوجدته عند الرافضة , وطلبت الحق فوجدته مع أصحاب الحديث .
[/size]

"I have asked for four and found them in four: I have asked for kufr and found it with the Jahmiyyah. I have asked for Kalam and riots and found it with the Mu'tazilah. And I have asked for lies and found them with the Rafidah. Then I have asked for the truth and I have found it with the people of Hadith (Ahl al-Hadith, Ahl al-Sunnah)." [al-Khatib al-Baghdadi in his 'Sharaf Ashab al-Hadith' 55/1]
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Rationalist

This is why I say that the Hadith of the Mahdi are neither Mutawatir or even Sahih. The Prophet (pbuh) never gave us enough detail on the Mahdi because its not part of aqeeda. Therefore, many pious Alids declared they were the Mahdi. I don't think they did it to deceive Muslims, but they did it because they actually believed they were the Mahdi. One example is Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). He believed he was  the Mahdi, and so did his father.

al-Habib

From my conversations with Shiites though, they don't believe these men or any other of the 'Alawis are even Ahl-al-bayt.  They say only the twelve imams and fatima are Ahl-al-bayt.  It makes no sense.

I was talking to one of them about Ismail ibn Jafar as-Sadiq and he said that the man isn't part of Ahl-al-bayt.

Rationalist

They are among the Nawasib if they believe that.

Ebn Hussein

This is why I say that the Hadith of the Mahdi are neither Mutawatir or even Sahih. The Prophet (pbuh) never gave us enough detail on the Mahdi because its not part of aqeeda. Therefore, many pious Alids declared they were the Mahdi. I don't think they did it to deceive Muslims, but they did it because they actually believed they were the Mahdi. One example is Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). He believed he was  the Mahdi, and so did his father.

Ahsant! As a matter of fact, the Sunni belief (Mahdi being not a core Aqidah issue, in fact some scholars rejected all ahadith about the Mahdi, so at best is one of the signs of Yawm al-Qiyamah) is fully supported by the Qur'an which neither mentioned the Mahdi nor the Bid'a of Mahdawiyyah/Intizar. If an unbiased person who never heard of Islam would read the Qur'an (and even some ahadith about the Mahdi) and  would then travel to Qom, staying for a year observing all the Ghuluww in the name of the hidden Rafidi saviour such as:

- Huge celebration of his birthday
- Considering him Hadhir-Nadhir (Omnipresent like a divine being, hence it is very common in Iran for example where I am from to see billboards that read "How can you sin when Sahib al-Zaman is watching you"? (I seek refuge with Allah from the kufr of the Rafidah)
- Giving him divine names that even a non-Muslim would understand that they belong to God only (such as the kufri title "ahib al-Zaman "The OWNER of the time"
- Literally praying to him (no tawassul), addressing him for ones needs (Ya mahdi adrikni, Ya mahdi aghithni, "Oh Mahdi help us" etc.

Would he recognise the aforementioned beliefs and rituals in the Qur'an (and Sunnah) he had studied? Certainly not, it's pure exaggeration, that is why like all deviant sects Shia resorted to even more exaggeration (out of sheer stubbornness obstinacy) and wrote books after books claiming that this and that verse and hundreds of other verses refer to their Mahdi (a literal abuse and mocking of the Qur'an, just like they do when they claim there are 300 and some say 1000's of verses about 'Ali alone in the Qur'an). It's such a reactionary sect based on mutashabihat, pathetic.

I don't think they did it to deceive Muslims, but they did it because they actually believed they were the Mahdi. One example is Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). He believed he was  the Mahdi, and so did his father.

What is your evidence that Nafs al-Zakiyyah claimed he was the Mahdi? As far as I know this is what some crazy Shias at his times believed, not what he claimed. Even Rafidah respect him, they would never do that if he had claimed to be the saviour, in fact the emergence Nafs al-Zakiyyah (which translates to "the purified soul") is regarded as a sign for the emergence of the Mahdi, according to Rafidism of course. Some Rafidis even claim that Moqtada al-Sadr's father was the Nafs al-Zakiyyah.

https://www.al-islam.org/articles/signs-reappearance-twelfth-imam-ajtf

From my conversations with Shiites though, they don't believe these men or any other of the 'Alawis are even Ahl-al-bayt.  They say only the twelve imams and fatima are Ahl-al-bayt.  It makes no sense.

I was talking to one of them about Ismail ibn Jafar as-Sadiq and he said that the man isn't part of Ahl-al-bayt.

That's not the point I was trying to make, most of them do not know how the children of their Imams turned super heretics. Most Shias are told that some of the sons of the Imams were simple not "infallible Ahl al-Bayt".
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Rationalist

This is why I say that the Hadith of the Mahdi are neither Mutawatir or even Sahih. The Prophet (pbuh) never gave us enough detail on the Mahdi because its not part of aqeeda. Therefore, many pious Alids declared they were the Mahdi. I don't think they did it to deceive Muslims, but they did it because they actually believed they were the Mahdi. One example is Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as). He believed he was  the Mahdi, and so did his father.

Ahsant! As a matter of fact, the Sunni belief (Mahdi being not a core Aqidah issue, in fact some scholars rejected all ahadith about the Mahdi, so at best is one of the signs of Yawm al-Qiyamah) is fully supported by the Qur'an which neither mentioned the Mahdi nor the Bid'a of Mahdawiyyah/Intizar. If an unbiased person who never heard of Islam would read the Qur'an (and even some ahadith about the Mahdi) and  would then travel to Qom, staying for a year observing all the Ghuluww in the name of the hidden Rafidi saviour such as:

- Huge celebration of his birthday
- Considering him Hadhir-Nadhir (Omnipresent like a divine being, hence it is very common in Iran for example where I am from to see billboards that read "How can you sin when Sahib al-Zaman is watching you"? (I seek refuge with Allah from the kufr of the Rafidah)
- Giving him divine names that even a non-Muslim would understand that they belong to God only (such as the kufri title "ahib al-Zaman "The OWNER of the time"
- Literally praying to him (no tawassul), addressing him for ones needs (Ya mahdi adrikni, Ya mahdi aghithni, "Oh Mahdi help us" etc.

Would he recognise the aforementioned beliefs and rituals in the Qur'an (and Sunnah) he had studied? Certainly not, it's pure exaggeration, that is why like all deviant sects Shia resorted to even more exaggeration (out of sheer stubbornness obstinacy) and wrote books after books claiming that this and that verse and hundreds of other verses refer to their Mahdi (a literal abuse and mocking of the Qur'an, just like they do when they claim there are 300 and some say 1000's of verses about 'Ali alone in the Qur'an). It's such a reactionary sect based on mutashabihat, pathetic.

There are exaggerated hadith where such as the  Mahdi filling the entire world with justice and equality while the Rafidah believe the Prophet (pbuh) and the 11 imams could not even convince Muslims to become momins.  Then we have hadith like a sky will announce the caliphate of the Mahdi, yet this never happened for none of the 11 imams. How can one put this together?
It makes no sense.
Even Prophet Isa's (as) return is not part of aqeeda. Although I am not denying it can happen, but the detail again is questionable.


 

What is your evidence that Nafs al-Zakiyyah claimed he was the Mahdi? As far as I know this is what some crazy Shias at his times believed, not what he claimed. Even Rafidah respect him, they would never do that if he had claimed to be the saviour, in fact the emergence Nafs al-Zakiyyah (which translates to "the purified soul") is regarded as a sign for the emergence of the Mahdi, according to Rafidism of course. Some Rafidis even claim that Moqtada al-Sadr's father was the Nafs al-Zakiyyah.

There is a narration in maqatil at Talibeen where Abdullah bin Hassan (as) tells Jafar bin Muhammad (as) to give bayah to his son and says he is the Mahdi.

al-Habib

Even Prophet Isa's (as) return is not part of aqeeda. Although I am not denying it can happen, but the detail again is questionable.

The descent of 'Isa ibn Maryam (as) is definitely part of Aqeedah. 

It says in Surah az-Zukhruf: "And indeed, Jesus will be [a sign for] knowledge of the Hour, so be not in doubt of it, and follow Me. This is a straight path" (43:61).

Also in Surah Nisa: "And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in Jesus before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be against them a witness" (4:159).  This verse means that all of the people of the book will believe in him before Jesus dies on Earth after his descent.

This is from the Qur'an, but the Sunnah is filled with evidence of the fact that 'Isa will descend.  Unlike the fictional 3aj3aj dajjal Sahib al-Sirdab.
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 11:04:34 PM by al-Habib »

Rationalist


This is from the Qur'an, but the Sunnah is filled with evidence of the fact that 'Isa will descend.  Unlike the fictional 3aj3aj dajjal Sahib al-Sirdab.

What the grading of hadith? I doubt its at a mutawatir level.

Ebn Hussein



What is your evidence that Nafs al-Zakiyyah claimed he was the Mahdi? As far as I know this is what some crazy Shias at his times believed, not what he claimed. Even Rafidah respect him, they would never do that if he had claimed to be the saviour, in fact the emergence Nafs al-Zakiyyah (which translates to "the purified soul") is regarded as a sign for the emergence of the Mahdi, according to Rafidism of course. Some Rafidis even claim that Moqtada al-Sadr's father was the Nafs al-Zakiyyah.

There is a narration in maqatil at Talibeen where Abdullah bin Hassan (as) tells Jafar bin Muhammad (as) to give bayah to his son and says he is the Mahdi.
[/quote]

Akhi, be careful. There is "a" narration is not a proof. You just accuse al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah of having been a lunatic who claimed to be the Mahdi. He never did that, nor is a book by a Zaydi (Abul-Faraj al-Isfahani) a proof for your statement. There are those among the 'Alids that based on numerous accounts have claimed to be the Mahdi, al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah is not among them.
الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله
لم أر أحداً من أهل الأهواء أشهد بالزور من الرافضة! - الخطيب في الكفاية والسوطي.

Imam Al-Shafi3i - may Allah have mercy upon him - said: "I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah." [narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

al-Habib


This is from the Qur'an, but the Sunnah is filled with evidence of the fact that 'Isa will descend.  Unlike the fictional 3aj3aj dajjal Sahib al-Sirdab.

What the grading of hadith? I doubt its at a mutawatir level.

They're sahih though.

Rationalist




Akhi, be careful. There is "a" narration is not a proof. You just accuse al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah of having been a lunatic who claimed to be the Mahdi. He never did that, nor is a book by a Zaydi (Abul-Faraj al-Isfahani) a proof for your statement. There are those among the 'Alids that based on numerous accounts have claimed to be the Mahdi, al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah is not among them.

I don't have an issue with it, since we don't have full details on the Mahdi. The Mahdi is not an divinely appointed Imam. He is just a scholar who will call people toward al Sunnah. So if Imam Nafs-az-Zakiyah (as) or these other aalids claimed they were Mahdi there is no big deal with it.


Rationalist


They're sahih though.

Yah and then we have hadith like a tree telling us a Jew is hiding here. These type of hadith make no sense.

Sister


They're sahih though.

Yah and then we have hadith like a tree telling us a Jew is hiding here. These type of hadith make no sense.



This is something that will take place at the end of times when things will be different from what makes sense to us today. Logically speaking, it doesn't make sense that a human gets swallowed by a fish (Yunus) and survives or speak from the cradle (Eesa) etc but we believe in it because Allah and his messenger speak the truth. Don't count on the human mind to tell you what makes sense and what doesn't because our mind is limited. It's all part of the power of Allah and what our mind can comprehend is not the limit to what Allah allows to happen. Just look at how we come into existense after being nothing.. makes no sense! Also remember that the dajjal will do things that make no sense. In fact, had you told people that there will be the internet and whatsapp a few hundred years ago, who would have thought it made sense?

Optimus Prime


They're sahih though.

Yah and then we have hadith like a tree telling us a Jew is hiding here. These type of hadith make no sense.



This is something that will take place at the end of times when things will be different from what makes sense to us today. Logically speaking, it doesn't make sense that a human gets swallowed by a fish (Yunus) and survives or speak from the cradle (Eesa) etc but we believe in it because Allah and his messenger speak the truth. Don't count on the human mind to tell you what makes sense and what doesn't because our mind is limited. It's all part of the power of Allah and what our mind can comprehend is not the limit to what Allah allows to happen. Just look at how we come into existense after being nothing.. makes no sense! Also remember that the dajjal will do things that make no sense. In fact, had you told people that there will be the internet and whatsapp a few hundred years ago, who would have thought it made sense?

The respected sister's post is full of rationality unlike the user Rationalist who at times thinks irrationally ironically enough.

If the narration is deemed authentic you accept it - simple as.

Hani

Re: Deviants amongst the 'Alids - A chronic of madmen who exploited their lineage
« Reply #16 on: September 01, 2016, 01:07:29 AM »
Let's not derail the thread.

The purpose is to show some early `Alawites/Hashemites were in fact deviant. This is true and several examples are present the most famous of which in Twelver literature is conveniently Ja`far al-Kazzab the son of an Imam and brother of an Imam.
عَلامَةُ أَهْلِ الْبِدَعِ الْوَقِيعَةُ فِي أَهْلِ الأَثَرِ. وَعَلامَةُ الْجَهْمِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُشَبِّهَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الْقَدَرِيَّةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ السُّنَّةِ مُجَبِّرَةً. وَعَلامَةُ الزَّنَادِقَةِ أَنْ يُسَمُّوا أَهْلَ الأَثَرِ حَشْوِيَّةً

Religion = simple & clear

Rationalist

Re: Deviants amongst the 'Alids - A chronic of madmen who exploited their lineage
« Reply #17 on: September 02, 2016, 02:06:08 AM »

This is something that will take place at the end of times when things will be different from what makes sense to us today. Logically speaking, it doesn't make sense that a human gets swallowed by a fish (Yunus) and survives or speak from the cradle (Eesa) etc but we believe in it because Allah and his messenger speak the truth. Don't count on the human mind to tell you what makes sense and what doesn't because our mind is limited. It's all part of the power of Allah and what our mind can comprehend is not the limit to what Allah allows to happen. Just look at how we come into existense after being nothing.. makes no sense! Also remember that the dajjal will do things that make no sense. In fact, had you told people that there will be the internet and whatsapp a few hundred years ago, who would have thought it made sense?
You don't seem to get it. My point is with the Quran I have to accept it. With hadith if its not mutawatir, so I don't have to accept it. Also, when we criticize these Mahdi hadith this is exactly how the 12ers will reply to you.

Rationalist

Re: Deviants amongst the 'Alids - A chronic of madmen who exploited their lineage
« Reply #18 on: September 02, 2016, 02:08:18 AM »

The respected sister's post is full of rationality unlike the user Rationalist who at times thinks irrationally ironically enough.

If the narration is deemed authentic you accept it - simple as.
Let's not derail the thread.

The purpose is to show some early `Alawites/Hashemites were in fact deviant. This is true and several examples are present the most famous of which in Twelver literature is conveniently Ja`far al-Kazzab the son of an Imam and brother of an Imam.

The leader of the  Zanj rebellion was criticized.

Sister

Re: Deviants amongst the 'Alids - A chronic of madmen who exploited their lineage
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2016, 04:59:08 AM »
The authenticity of a hadith is not judged based on what people think sounds logical. How 12ers reply is irrelevent as this religion is based on quran and authentic hadith and the hadith in question is authentic according to our scholars.

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
592 Views
Last post October 02, 2017, 01:59:39 PM
by Ijtaba
4 Replies
3487 Views
Last post March 23, 2020, 03:22:56 PM
by Soccer
0 Replies
296 Views
Last post July 05, 2020, 10:49:16 PM
by Noor-us-Sunnah