The position of the fırst three caliphs
- Imam Rassi Society
-
Topic Author
- Offline
- Moderator
-
10 years 2 months ago - 10 years 2 months ago #101
by Imam Rassi Society
The position of the fırst three caliphs was created by Imam Rassi Society
Reposted
As salaamu alaykum,
JazakAllah Khair brother! So one question, where does this leave Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman (ra)?
As salaamu alaykum.
Usually, after discussing the issue of the explicit appointment of Ali (as) the next question that usually arises is the Zaydi position on the first three Caliphs. Below is an excerpt from an aqeeda commentary Kitaab al-Idaah fi Sharh al-Misbaah:
Regarding the judgment concerning those who preceded Amir al-Mumineen (as) in the imamate, such as Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan, the consensus of the Prophet’s Descendants holds that they were in error when they preceded him. They are declared disobedient by that. This is because the explicit appointment of ‘Ali’s imamate is established by clear and unequivocal text. Its proof was elucidated.
Ad-Dawaari said that the majority of the Prophet’s Descendants do not consider them disobedient. Some declared them disobedient and some did not, and they disagreed. Some of them reserved judgment (tawaqqaf). This [i.e. reservation] is the position of the majority of the Zaydis. Some also pray for Allah’s pleasure for them, such as Sayyid Mu’ayyad Billah, al-Kani, Qadi Ja’far, and others.
I say: This is the position of the majority of later Zaydis.
They say that due to their preeminence and the Messenger’s praise for them, as well as what has come in the Qur’aan concerning Allah being pleased with them, such as the verse {Verily, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to thee under the tree} and so forth. We are certain of their true faith, and one cannot speak of them except with true faith.
I say: This statement does not preclude that they can never be guilty of disobedience. Our knowledge of their true faith is subject to abrogation clearly. Regarding their praise and the declaration of pleasure on them, this applies to them before being guilty of disobedience.
They say that disobedience is either major sin or minor sin. One cannot apply their act of disobedience to either category with definitive proof.
I say: Since it is established the imam after Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, was ‘Ali (as), it does not apply. This is because they prevented the imam from that which was his right. This is a form of rebellion. Rebellion is a form of disobedience by consensus. It is the root of every other major sin of disobedience like that which can be proven with definitive proof. This is the original doctrine (madhhab) of the Prophet’s Descendants (as) as was stated.
And Allah knows best!
IRS
As salaamu alaykum,
JazakAllah Khair brother! So one question, where does this leave Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman (ra)?
As salaamu alaykum.
Usually, after discussing the issue of the explicit appointment of Ali (as) the next question that usually arises is the Zaydi position on the first three Caliphs. Below is an excerpt from an aqeeda commentary Kitaab al-Idaah fi Sharh al-Misbaah:
Regarding the judgment concerning those who preceded Amir al-Mumineen (as) in the imamate, such as Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthmaan, the consensus of the Prophet’s Descendants holds that they were in error when they preceded him. They are declared disobedient by that. This is because the explicit appointment of ‘Ali’s imamate is established by clear and unequivocal text. Its proof was elucidated.
Ad-Dawaari said that the majority of the Prophet’s Descendants do not consider them disobedient. Some declared them disobedient and some did not, and they disagreed. Some of them reserved judgment (tawaqqaf). This [i.e. reservation] is the position of the majority of the Zaydis. Some also pray for Allah’s pleasure for them, such as Sayyid Mu’ayyad Billah, al-Kani, Qadi Ja’far, and others.
I say: This is the position of the majority of later Zaydis.
They say that due to their preeminence and the Messenger’s praise for them, as well as what has come in the Qur’aan concerning Allah being pleased with them, such as the verse {Verily, Allah was pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to thee under the tree} and so forth. We are certain of their true faith, and one cannot speak of them except with true faith.
I say: This statement does not preclude that they can never be guilty of disobedience. Our knowledge of their true faith is subject to abrogation clearly. Regarding their praise and the declaration of pleasure on them, this applies to them before being guilty of disobedience.
They say that disobedience is either major sin or minor sin. One cannot apply their act of disobedience to either category with definitive proof.
I say: Since it is established the imam after Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, was ‘Ali (as), it does not apply. This is because they prevented the imam from that which was his right. This is a form of rebellion. Rebellion is a form of disobedience by consensus. It is the root of every other major sin of disobedience like that which can be proven with definitive proof. This is the original doctrine (madhhab) of the Prophet’s Descendants (as) as was stated.
And Allah knows best!
IRS
Last edit: 10 years 2 months ago by Imam Rassi Society.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.166 seconds
- You are here:
-
Home
-
Forum
-
Questions
-
Theological Questions
- The position of the fırst three caliphs