I have some questions on the Zaydiyya

In the Name of Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

Wa alaikum as-salam

This message, compared to previous ones, is vastly more disappointing than them, the amount of falsehood in it is, compared to anything prior to this, immense. A series of short clarifications:

> It seems that you have misunderstood what Brother Kazim is doing here.

When I said Kadhim Al-Zaydi (may Allah lengthen his life and protect him from evil) "defended" him I meant from excessive attacks such as attributing to him dogmatic Sunnism and nasb, not that Kadhim Al-Zaydi (may Allah lengthen his life and protect him from evil) affirms his beliefs.

Next you say some nonsense that I tried to shift the discussion from the kufr of Mu'awiya رضي الله عنه to his apostasy, when I swear by Allah, an oath anyone can verify by simply reading this thread, that the point of contention was always his apostasy. Then you say I have some kind of an issue with the notion he is a kafir, when I called him a kafir in this very thread! I accept the ijma!

So far as you saying I seem like a "Waziri", call us that then! I just wanted to clarify we have not adorned ourselves with this name ourselves, but if you would call us after the noble Imam Ibn al-Wazir عليه السلام, okay, no harm in this!

Finally, may the peace, blessings and mercy of Allah (Ta'ala) be upon Badr Ad-Deen Al-Houthi and his son, ameen. I barely make a criticism of them and I am already a dog barking against them and a nasibi, I say we should fight and die alongside them and I am a dog barking against them and a nasibi, it is unsurprising you called Ash-Shawkani and Ibn al-Amir haters of ahlulbayt عليهم السلام when you will call me, who called to jihad with these men, their reviler and hater, what is my reviling of him? Being aware of basic statements he made? I will find those in a few days as I said prior to this inshallah, he did admire the Iranian revolution and this does not mean he is an Imami Rafidhi nor a muqaleed of Khomeini or anything, he just thinks people rising up to oppose imperialism and establish islamic states is the most correct political modality.

Finally you say:

It seems that you somehow think the Zaydis are democrats, and that an Imamate is established by shūrā. Once again, you prove how ignorant you are. You actually know nothing about Zaydism. And why do you even care about their understanding of Imamate if you do not claim to be Zaydī yourself?

You astonish me!!! When there is a claimant for the Imamate, he visits the great scholars and they test him, and this is a process of "shura", and you say merely by being aware of this fact I am saying the Zaydiyya practice a democracy! The system does require consultation with the great scholars of the time not with every layman.

Your hostility has never been anything except excessive.

In the Name of Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

--a short addendum--

Also I just thought I would briefly note something amusing: While traditional Zaydism has really high standards for who the Imam of Obedience is and the proper way for an Imamate to be established, Qadi Ash-Shawkani and Imam Ibn al-Wazir رحمها الله actually have lower standards for it. Why do I bring this up? Because it may very well be that Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi is the Imam who is obligatory to obey, at least as far as my own views are concerned!

But the reason I brought it up is because in this conversation you have positioned yourself as the defender of "traditional" Zaydism as opposed to my (alleged) novelties, so I was rather shocked at your estimation of Badr Ad-Deen Al-Houthi as Imam, when neither he nor his son have made the dawah to it nor did they go through the shura (which I explained in my previous post is not the same thing as democracy in the west!), in simple terms, without making the call to their imamate or consulting the major figures of the Zaydiyya about the Imamate, or having the lofty academic credentials most Zaydi scholars like to see.

I will say, inshallah his son is the Imam of obedience, given what I know of him, and Allah knows best.
 

In the Name of Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

--a research of various statements relevant to the Ansarallah, Badr Ad-Deen Al-Houthi, Housain Al-Houthi, and Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi--

--Part 1: Research In The Website SalvationArk--

The Imam Rassi Society say Sayyid Badrudeen Al-Houthi رحمه الله reached the level of an Imam of Knowledge[1] who some say would be suitable to be an Imam of Obedience[2], that there are some Zaydi scholars who distance themselves from the Ansarallah[3], but there are some who support their effort[3].

--Part 2: Research In The Text The Huthi Movement in Yemen--

Husayn Al-Houthi travelled to Iran with his Father in the 80s, but there is no evidence of them openly adopting Khomeini's ideas at this time, which Husayn Al-Houthi would do later[4]. "He also was a keen reader and admirer of Ayatollah Khomeini whose opinions—particularly those that pertain to Islam’s revolutionary revival as well as the vilification of the West and America—al-Huthi often cites in his lectures in the Malāzim."[5]

The text says: "The first public reaction to the Huthis by the traditionalists was in 2004, when Husayn al-Huthi was still alive. It took the form of “A Declaration by Zaydi Scholars” (Bayān min ͑ulamā͗ al-Zaydiyya) and was published in Hizb al-Haqq’s newspaper al-Umma. At the time the party had become weak and was under the leadership of the late Hasan Zayd. The declaration was signed by a number of the leading scholars in Sanaa. In it, these scholars warn against Husayn al-Huthi’s teachings in the Malāzim and declare them to be reprehensible innovations and errors (bid`a wa ḍalālāt) that are in no way associated with the Zaydi sect or the teachings of the Prophet’s family. The scholars informed the public that it is impermissible to listen to, approve of, or affirm al-Huthi’s views. In particular, two passages are singled out from the Malāzim as evidence of the heinous nature of al-Huthi’s views. These deserve to be reproduced because they underscore the rupture that traditional Zaydis assert al-Huthi’s teachings represent. Speaking in the plural, al-Huthi states in the Malāzim:

    "We have found ourselves in the end spending our days with books that are entirely error-filled, from start to finish, such as the books on jurisprudence and its principles. These lie at the heart of all the error we find ourselves in, [they are] the reason for the immobility and defeat of the Zaydis, the reason for the low vitality of the Zaydis. This is wholly different from what had prevailed [in times past] among our ancestors of the Prophet’s house and their supporters. [These books] are what we spend our nights studying and we carry them to the mosques, and yet how far they are from the reality of the mosques."

    
Switching to the first person singular and in a different lesson in the Malāzim,
al-Huthi states:

    "I feel from my study of the Noble Quran and from my contemplation of reality— and in the minds of many I may be wrong—that the Zaydis live in a state of humiliation that is worse than that which was imposed [by God] on the Children of Israel (Banū Isrā’īl). Our scholars, students and our entire society live in a state that is more demeaning and humiliating than that which God almighty inflicted on the Children of Israel because we have abandoned our responsibility. . . . I personally believe that the worst thing that has afflicted us and distanced us from the Quran, from God’s religion, from a sound vision of life and religion, from God almighty is the science of jurisprudence (uṣūl al-fiqh). I will state it clearly: The science of jurisprudence is among the worst sciences, and the science of theology, which the Mu‘tazila invented, is the vilest cause that has led us to this dreadful state and has distanced us from God, from His Messenger and from His prophets.""[6]

In 2012, the Ansarallah seem to have sought some degree of reconciliation with the traditional Zaydi Scholars, signing a text with them called “The Intellectual and Cultural Charter” (al-Wathīqa al-fikriyya wa-l-thaqāfiyya) in which they all agree on some core positions of traditional Zaydis and the Ansarallah.[8]

The Ansarallah express a preference for earlier Zaydi Imams over later ones, Husayn Al-Houthi stated:

    "In general, all are in agreement about the method (manhaj) of the Ahl al-Bayt with respect to their principles and beliefs and to which the guiding imams have adhered from the dawn of Islam to our present time, from the earliest to the most recent. Yet, we prefer (nurajjiḥ) the method of the earliest imams such as al-Hādī [Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn] and al-Qāsim [b. Ibrāhīm] because they are closer to the Quranic method (al-uslūb al-Qur’ānī) and the divine nature (al-fiṭra alrabbāniyya)."[9]

Later in the text, we find this description: "...Husayn al-Huthi did not conceal his fascination with the Iranian model, holding Ayatollah Khomeini to be a just and righteous leader, whose efforts to resist Western influence in the Middle East should be imitated. From this standpoint, it becomes obvious that there are two main words that reflect the dominance of Iran in the mind of Husayn Al-Huthi, as they are among the twenty most frequently used words in his discourse, namely Iran (114) times and Khomeini (89) times."[9]

Further: "In his view, the Islamic Republic of Iran was the best example to follow, and its founder, Khomeini, was the best leader to imitate. He referred positively to Khomeini because of Iran’s position in the world and because of Iranians’ ability to resist Western pressures and remain self-reliant. In his discourse, Khomeini was a just and righteous leader and a great man who was able to humiliate his enemies; he was also impressed by Khomeini because he had planted the seeds of animosity toward Israel and the United States in Iran."[9]

Later, Husayn Al-Houthi is quoted as saying:

    "After the Iranians had been threatened, they said: If America strikes, or if it thinks about striking, they will be hit by a direct and severe blow. They know Iran, and they know the people of Iran, as well as they know that Iran has been able to build itself militarily, economically and culturally."[9]

    
Later, the text notes that Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi has, unlike his brother, not engaged in much explicit praise or endorsement of Iran or Khomeinism.[10]

--Part 3: Conclusion--

I would first like to apologize as while it seems like Sayyid Badrudeen Al-Houthi رحمه الله had some relationship with the Iranians, the emphatic support of it seems to belong to his son Husayn, not him, so I misremembered that.

I could have continued my research beyond these two sources, and if it is requested of me I will inshallah, however given Imam Rassi Society's admission that some Zaydi scholars did indeed distance themselves from the Ansarallah[3], and given that both myself and Ibn Kamal respect the Imam Rassi Society greatly, I hope what is found in this English secondary source suffices as evidence.

--Part 4: Final Notes--

I swear by Allah, when researching the Ansarallah, I found repeatedly mentioned in their rhetoric an opposition to sectarianism. They claim that their truest cause is bringing people together. I ask anyone here who is a passionate supporter of them to take that to heart. I apologize again for mistakenly attributing some statements of his son to Sayyid Badrudeen Al-Houthi رحمه الله who I accept as an Imam of knowledge. Astagfirullah. May Allah guide us, amin.

--Part 5: Sources Cited--

[1] www.salvationark.com/salvationark1/index...-amirudeen-al-houthi
[2] www.salvationark.com/salvationark1/index...ical/15-current-imam
[3] salvationark.com/salvationark1/index.php...-religious-authority
[4] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 20). I.B. Tauris
[5] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (pp. 20-21). I.B. Tauris
[6] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 27). I.B. Tauris
[7] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 28). I.B. Tauris
[8] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 28). I.B. Tauris
[9] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 47). I.B. Tauris
[10] Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 48). I.B. Tauris

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

السلام عليكم

This message, compared to previous ones, is vastly more disappointing than them, the amount of falsehood in it is, compared to anything prior to this, immense. A series of short clarifications:

> It seems that you have misunderstood what Brother Kazim is doing here.

When I said Kadhim Al-Zaydi (may Allah lengthen his life and protect him from evil) "defended" him I meant from excessive attacks such as attributing to him dogmatic Sunnism and nasb, not that Kadhim Al-Zaydi (may Allah lengthen his life and protect him from evil) affirms his beliefs.

Your not sincere in proclaiming that my messages are full of falsehood while you have been until now mostly wrong in your claims, misinterpreting the scholars and their works and struggling to answer properly, at least you are improving and that can be seen that you at least admit your mistakes.

Even if you meant that he was defending him from excessive attacks you are wrong. He was not defending him except in the sense that he wanted to show his true aqidaa, the question was not about his dogmatism or nasb.

Next you say some nonsense that I tried to shift the discussion from the kufr of Mu'awiya رضي الله عنه to his apostasy, when I swear by Allah, an oath anyone can verify by simply reading this thread, that the point of contention was always his apostasy. Then you say I have some kind of an issue with the notion he is a kafir, when I called him a kafir in this very thread! I accept the ijma!

Yes you tried to shift the discussion. The evidence for that is what you said directly after calling him a kafir: "But to take this as we should carry out the apostasy punishment of all these kuffar is not appropriate and this is known even to the Zaydi-Hadawis and is not my innovation."
And you are not sincere in your acceptance of the Ijmaa, this can be seen by the fact that you invoke the satisfaction of Allah jalla jalaluhu on him.

So far as you saying I seem like a "Waziri", call us that then! I just wanted to clarify we have not adorned ourselves with this name ourselves, but if you would call us after the noble Imam Ibn al-Wazir عليه السلام, okay, no harm in this!

Finally, at last you accept that you are your own sect. الحمدالله

Finally, may the peace, blessings and mercy of Allah (Ta'ala) be upon Badr Ad-Deen Al-Houthi and his son, ameen. I barely make a criticism of them and I am already a dog barking against them and a nasibi, I say we should fight and die alongside them and I am a dog barking against them and a nasibi, it is unsurprising you called Ash-Shawkani and Ibn al-Amir haters of ahlulbayt عليهم السلام when you will call me, who called to jihad with these men, their reviler and hater, what is my reviling of him? Being aware of basic statements he made? I will find those in a few days as I said prior to this inshallah, he did admire the Iranian revolution and this does not mean he is an Imami Rafidhi nor a muqaleed of Khomeini or anything, he just thinks people rising up to oppose imperialism and establish islamic states is the most correct political modality.

This truly aged well! شكرا

You astonish me!!! When there is a claimant for the Imamate, he visits the great scholars and they test him, and this is a process of "shura", and you say merely by being aware of this fact I am saying the Zaydiyya practice a democracy! The system does require consultation with the great scholars of the time not with every layman.

Your hostility has never been anything except excessive.

No, you misunderstood again.
There is no shart/condition which is called "acceptance of the scholars".
If an contender fullfills all the shuroot and proclaims his imamate he becomes the Imam who's acceptance is an obligation on all the people.
His Imamate is established by the fullfillment of the shuroot not by the aknowledgement of the shuroot (by others), that is a big difference. The process of shura and aknowledgment is only important as so far as it is needed to spread his legitimacy and strengthen it, but him being an fatimid, righteous, alim and proclaiming his imamate, by that, he is already established as an Imam. 

Thats why Imamuna Abu Talib al-Haruni alayhi as-salam said this in his book :اعلم أنه لا خلاف بين الزيدية في أن الإمامة تثبت بالدعوة متى حصلت الأوصاف التي يصلح معها كونه إماماً وإن لم يكن منصوصاً عليه من جهة الرسول صلى الله عليه، وإنما اختلفوا في نص الإمام على إمام بعده هل يكفي في ثبوت إمامته أو يحتاج معه إلى مقارنة الدعوة إياه.  فأما ما يدل على أنها تثبت بالدعوة: أنا قد علمنا أن الإمام لا يصير إماماً بمجرد اجتماع الأوصاف فيه، ولا بد في ثبوت إمامته من سبب يوجب ذلك، فلا يخلو ذلك السبب: من أن يكون الإختيار على ما يذهب إليه أصحابنا المعتزلة، أو النص على ما تذهب إليه الإمامية، أو الدعوة على ما نقوله، إذا قد بينا فساد القول بأنها لا تستحق على وجه الإرث، ولا جزاء على الأعمال، وقد دلت الدلالة على فساد القول بالنص والإختيار، لما قدمناه، فلم يبق إلا أن يكون مثبت وجوبها هو الدعوة على ما نذهب إليه.
 "Know that there is no disagreement among the Zaidis that the Imamate is established through a call (da‘wa) once the qualities that make one fit to be an Imam are present, even if the person has not been explicitly designated by the Prophet ﷺ. The disagreement lies in whether the designation of an Imam for the next Imam is sufficient to establish his Imamate, or whether it also requires summoning him through the call (da‘wa).As for what indicates that the Imamate is established through the call: we know that the Imam does not become an Imam merely by the presence of the necessary qualities. There must be a cause that establishes his Imamate. This cause can only be one of the following: selection (ikhtiyar), as the Mu‘tazilites hold; designation (nass), as the Imamis hold; or the call (da‘wa), as we maintain. We have shown that the view that inheritance alone suffices is flawed, and that deeds alone are not sufficient. Likewise, the evidence shows the invalidity of the claims based on nass and ikhtiyar, as we have demonstrated earlier. Therefore, what remains to establish the necessity of the Imamate is the call, as we argue."As for my hostility, it is not excessive, i'm doing what our Aimma alayhim as-salam always did, showing the innovator where his place is.

Also I just thought I would briefly note something amusing: While traditional Zaydism has really high standards for who the Imam of Obedience is and the proper way for an Imamate to be established, Qadi Ash-Shawkani and Imam Ibn al-Wazir رحمها الله actually have lower standards for it. Why do I bring this up? Because it may very well be that Abdul-Malik Al-Houthi is the Imam who is obligatory to obey, at least as far as my own views are concerned!

That is not amusing and shows only your deviance. How are your standards being lower something good? IT is actually something bad. It is exactly what the Ahl al Sunnah did, they went from the Imamate of the Quraysh, to the Imamate of the Ajam, to the Sultanate of the Ajam and crashed into the democracy of the west, but in an perverted dicatorical way. Even that, democracy, they could not implement properly. Thats how weak the sunni path is.

But the reason I brought it up is because in this conversation you have positioned yourself as the defender of "traditional" Zaydism as opposed to my (alleged) novelties, so I was rather shocked at your estimation of Badr Ad-Deen Al-Houthi as Imam, when neither he nor his son have made the dawah to it nor did they go through the shura (which I explained in my previous post is not the same thing as democracy in the west!), in simple terms, without making the call to their imamate or consulting the major figures of the Zaydiyya about the Imamate, or having the lofty academic credentials most Zaydi scholars like to see.

I called Imam Badr al-Din Ibn Amir al-Din alayhi as-salam as an Imam but that doesnt mean that i called him an political Imam of obedience, that was your imagination. As for his credentials, i am sure that he actually could have been an Imam of Obedience, for his academic credentials are so high that people like you cannot even fathom it. The same goes for Imam Majd al-Din al-Muayyadi alayhi as salam as well. 

I will say, inshallah his son is the Imam of obedience, given what I know of him, and Allah knows best.

I do not know anything about him making Dawah to himself. 
و الله اعلام

Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 20). I.B. Tauris

I am astonished that you really made an Analysis.
I can say that you are at least sincere about trying improve yourself, for that you get a compliment from me. 
But this source of yours: Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 20). I.B. Tauris
Is disqualifying your research and your contribution to anything about the matter of the Huthis and Ansar Allah.

Abdullah Hamidaddin received his education in Saudi Arabia and works closely with Saudi institutions, including the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies.

That is like citing an Analysis of the Ummayad Government Scholars on the Zaydiyya.

Try to research the Huthis and Ansar Allah from their own sources and your opinion should change significantly.

At least you admitted in wronging the great Imam Badr al-Din Ibn Amir al-Din al-Huthi alayhi as-salam.

For the readers: Husayn Badr al-Din is his son. The mentioned statements are from his series of duroos about Quran and other religious Subjects.
Caution on translations from people who are working for the opponents of the zaydiyya, i doubt they tranlsate the sentences how they were intended or that they mention the proper context. 

wa salam

In the Name of Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

wa alaikum assalam

At this point our original topics are exhausted, anything relevant to the most core discussion has left our discourse, and we are chasing tangents of tangents. As usual there is little to reply to and what little there is disappoints me greatly.

So far as this nonsense about me shifting the discussion, I will simply repeat myself that my very first message was explicitly clarifying that I took issue with Zulfiqar313 calling Mu'awiya رضي الله عنه an apostate and explicitly clarifying that I do not consider it appropriate to do so on the basis of someone's kufr, this is present on page 4 for anyone to see. This narrative that I shifted "away" from talking about his kufr after affirming it is idiotic. What else is there to say after I affirm it? What do I gain from that? Idiocy.

>  There is no shart/condition which is called "acceptance of the scholars".

Idiocy. If the ulema رحمهم الله do not know anything about the Imamate claimant how do they verify he meets the conditions? Magic? Sihr? A miracle? Or should the laymen verify it? Does Allah (Subhanahu) ask Jibril to inform us whether he does. WHETHER THE IMAM DOES FULFILL THE CONDITIONS IS A MATTER OF IJTIHAD. WHO DO YOU SUGGEST IN THE ZAYDI COMMUNITY SHOULD DO THIS IJTIHAD, IMBECILE?

> That is not amusing and shows only your deviance. How are your standards being lower something good? IT is actually something bad.

Baby's first understanding of usul-al-fiqh. More lenient rulings are always worse than more strict ones everyone!!! 

> But this source of yours: Hamidaddin, A. (2022). The Huthi Movement in Yemen (p. 20). I.B. Tauris Is disqualifying your research and your contribution to anything about the matter of the Huthis and Ansar Allah.

I said explicitly I was just using it to elaborate on the details of what the Imam Rassi Society said, not to independently prove a point. I expected you to say some nonsense like this as I have spoken to people like you before and you are typically extraordinarily paranoid about such things.

If I ever reply to you again, know that you said something which touched on a subject that I regard as important. My last few messages have been nothing but me idly swiping away falsehoods like annoying buzzing mosquitos and at this point they are not even falsehoods related to the school, but to my own person, and I care little for my own reputation, and much for the reputation of these ulema رحمهم الله.

I will repeat my earlier call: whoever has a question, ask.

And to end what may be my final message in this thread with a message to the Imam Rassi Society: my initial comments of gratitude were sincere. I swear by Allah I did not imagine my initial friendly message would lead to fitnah on this forum inshallah. If I felt that my replies were not needed I would not have made them inshallah, but knowledge about the true reality of these scholars is the most rare thing to find and so I felt an obligation fell on me, and I do not deny I am unfit to bear it, but I tried my best. May Allah bless you all in your future endeavors, amin.

and Allah knows best.

Idiocy. If the ulema رحمهم الله do not know anything about the Imamate claimant how do they verify he meets the conditions? Magic? Sihr? A miracle? Or should the laymen verify it? Does Allah (Subhanahu) ask Jibril to inform us whether he does. WHETHER THE IMAM DOES FULFILL THE CONDITIONS IS A MATTER OF IJTIHAD. WHO DO YOU SUGGEST IN THE ZAYDI COMMUNITY SHOULD DO THIS IJTIHAD, IMBECILE?

1. You have truly a problem with understanding basic masail.
2. Imbecile? That is not nice. You lack proper akhlaq and adab.
3. I have the feeling that you have actually narcisstic tendencies.
4. The way you talk about your self so many times and get emotional is not normal.


أسأل الله أن يرزقك الهداية، ويعينك على الشفاء، وحُسن الأدب، وكمال الأخلاق. آمين

May Allah give you hidayah and help you heal and get better adab and akhaq. ameen.

و السلام