/lit/ - Literature

>>20582133
Look into the Zaydis; they're Shias who believe in the Imams but don't believe that they're infallible.

Supporting this thread. I hope the Iranian shiaanon who wrote some pretty informative stuff a couple of weeks ago shows up. Also, we need the shia reading list/chart.

His relatives were taken care of until Hussein at least

>>20582197
Fatima died young and in an undisclosed location. Her husband and 2 sons were murdered...

>>20582133
Are you familiar with Hermeticism, Gnosticism, or even Sufism? Shi'ism represents the esoteric side of Islam. The Shia narrations talk about a majority of Muslims (al-'amma) who are supposed to follow the exoteric laws of sharia along with the outward meaning of the Qur'an, and an elite minority of Believers (al-khassa) who are initiated by the Imam into divine mysteries and the inner meaning of the Quran. What you call "exagerrated status" are ideas common to all esoteric traditions. I am specifically speaking about the Universal Man, which is represented by the Imam.
>>20582147
>dude just do suicidal jihad like zayd lmao
>>20582149
Glad to be of help, anon. I can write up a list of important books right now if you want. I'll make the chart later.

>>20582147
The concept of Imamah in itself seems problematic. Don't they have a list of imams going up to this day and age? What is the point?

>>20582222
>I can write up a list of important books right now if you want.
Yes, please. Also if you can recommend lecturers or other information in video/audio form, I'd be thankful. My eyes are still tired as I work on the computer a lot, so I'd rather have something I can listen to for now if that is possible. If not, I'll save the list and read them another time. Thanks.

>>20582222
A priestly class having some exclusive knowledge of the religion of God seems to go against the claims of the Qur'an that it is a clear book, a Guidance to mankind. Unless you mean that the inner secrets are not necessary for the believers salvation, I can understand how one who contemplates would peel more and more layers of Truth than one who doesn't.

>>20582238
>Don't they have a list of imams going up to this day and age?
I don't believe Zaydis have a current imam, nor do Twelvers (well, technically they believe that the twelfth imam is still alive, but he's in occultation and therefore doesn't communicate with the faithful). Ismailis do have a current imam.

>>20582280
that is why Kharijites knew what's right

>>20582313
I'll put my trust in Ali instead of those who opposed him.

>>20582240
I know just the right lecturer for you. Saiyad Nizamuddin Ahmad is a Shia scholar who uploads some very informative lectures. To start I recommend his Karbala lectures (linked below).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj7XRHlPsUY&list=PLVgpvGYBxxJUVH2xbPAooXozDmgIs2-lV
Also you can find some interesting lectures by Nasr and Amir-Moezzi.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VB5-l299Ikc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j-7QA-pgAA

Seyyed Hossein Nasr has some good introductions to Islam as a whole:
Islam: Religion, History, and Civilization
The Heart of Islam: Enduring Values for Humanity
Ideals and Realities of Islam
Muhammad: Man of God

I'll first give some books by the traditional scholars, and then I'll introduce books by the academic scholarship. A great traditional overview of Shi'ism by the most important 20th century Shia scholar, Muhammad Husayn Tabatabai:
Shi'ite Islam
http://faculty.umsu.ac.ir/DownloadHandler.ashx?pID=33&sectionID=71&file=Shia-in-Islam+-+Copy.pdf&SectionType=DownloadList&FileID=26
Quran in Islam
https://www.al-islam.org/quran-islam-its-impact-and-influence-life-muslims-sayyid-muhammad-husayn-tabatabai
A Shi'ite Anthology
https://www.al-islam.org/quran-islam-its-impact-and-influence-life-muslims-sayyid-muhammad-husayn-tabatabai

An overview of doctrines by an important classical scholar, Shaykh Saduq:
https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-creed-shaykh-saduq/tract-beliefs-shia-imamiya

Another overview of doctrines by a contemporary Grand Ayatollah, Ja'far Sobhani:
Doctrines of Shiʻi Islam

Sobhani has also written a good biography of the Prophet:
https://www.al-islam.org/message-jafar-subhani

For the events that immediately followed after the death of the Prophet, read Kitab Sulaym ibn Qays, attributed to Sulaym, a companion of Imam Ali. If the attribution is correct, it would be the first hadith book written in Islam. It details the things Abu Bakr and Umar did to usurp power.
http://al-mostabserin.com/english/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Kitab-e-Sulaym-Ibn-Qays-Al-Hilali.pdf
https://www.hubeali.com/kitab-e-sulaym/

For a classical overview of the life of the Imams, see Kitab al-Irshad by Shaykh Mufid.
https://www.shia-maktab.info/index.php/en/library/books/english?format=raw&task=download&fid=93

A set of short overviews of Islamic sciences by Morteza Motahhari, an important 20th century scholar:
Understanding Islamic Sciences
This includes logic, principles of jurisprudence and law, as well as philosophy and gnosis.

Cont.

>>20582240
If you decide to convert and practice, you would need to read a book of law. This one is by Grand Ayatollah Sistani, the Marja (source of imitation) followed by most Shias today.
https://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/
He has also written a book of rulings for Muslims living in the West:
https://www.sistani.org/english/book/46/

Philosophy is usualy introduced in Shia seminaries with Tabatabai's book Bidayah al-Hikmah (translated as The Elements of Islamic Metaphysics). Keep in mind it would be helpful to read some secondary lit first, such as the one by Nasr or Corbin. The greatest Shia philosopher is Mulla Sadra. A good book to get into him is Metaphysical Penetrations. Again, you should probably read some secondary lit on Islamic philosophy first.

Tabatabai has a very good book on gnosis/mysticism (irfan), called Lubb al-Lubab (translated as Kernel of the Kernel, see below). The most important Shia gnostic would be Sayyed Haydar Amuli, the great commentator of Ibn Arabi. By him read Inner Secrets of the Path.
http://islamicblessings.com/upload/Kernel%20of%20the%20Kernel.pdf
https://www.al-islam.org/inner-secrets-path-sayyid-haydar-amuli

For academic scholarship I recommend everything written by Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi. You can start with these:
What is Shi'i Islam?
The Divine Guide in Early Shi'ism
The Silent Qur'an and the Speaking Qur'an

The Succession to Muhammad by Wilferd Madelung is a very good historical account of the events that occured after the death of the Prophet.

The most important Orientalist who focused on Shi'ism would probably be Henry Corbin. He was also a Heideggerian philosopher and a close acquintance of C.G. Jung, so he not only presents the ideas but also philosophically engages with them. Highly recommended but unfortunately his masterwork En Islam iranien remains untranslated. You can read his History of Islamic Philosophy which has a section on Shi'i Prophetic philosophy.

A very interesting book by a British female academic who converted to Shi'ism: Shi'i Spirituality for the Twenty-First Century by Rebecca Masterton

The most important primary sources would be the Qur'an first of course. I recommend The Study Quran by Nasr since it gives you the Shia interpretation of the verses along with the Sunni. Then Nahj al-Balagha, the collected sermons and letters of Imam Ali. Sahifa al-Sajjadiya, the supplications of the 4th Imam, Ali ibn Husayn al-Sajjad (translated as The Psalms of Islam by William Chittick). And Kitab al-Kafi, the most important collection of Shia hadith; the first two volumes are about theology/spirituality/doctrine/etc., volumes 3-7 are about law, the last volume is a selection from the letters and sermons of the Imams on various topics.

>>20582280
It's indeed not necessary for everyone, but people of higher spiritual capacities of course need to practice religion on a higher level. The Quran itself says there are things in it that not everyone understands:

"He it is Who has sent down the Book upon thee; therein are signs determined; they are the Mother of the Book, and others symbolic. As for those whose hearts are given to swerving, they follow that of it which is symbolic, seeking temptation and seeking its interpretation. And none know its interpretation save God and those firmly rooted in knowledge. They say, 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord.' And none remember, save those who possess intellect." (Q 3:7 The Study Quran's translation).
>>20582284
The Imam of the Twelvers still has still important functions during the Occultation. Esoterically he serves as the spiritual Pole guiding the Believers, exoterically there have been weird events happened that Shias associate with the Imam or at least his companions. There are also some very interesting accounts of seeing him in person. Even Ibn Arabi claims to have seen him.
>>20582354
Based.

>>20582500
>A Shi'ite Anthology
Oops posted the wrong link for this. Here is the link:
https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-anthology-sayyid-muhammad-husayn-tabatabai

>>20582537
>weird events
Can you give us an example? Sounds very interesting.

Dudebro, you were probably the one I conversed with in that other thread about imamah, I'm OP.

A few questions if you can answer-

X why wasn't Aisha punished by Ali in the battle of the Camel?
X if the incident of the door is true, why did Ali not do anything in response to it? Was he not the lion of God?
X If Ali's position was divine, why did He not fight for his right? If it was to protect Islam, one could argue that under that view Islam was already lost since the Ummah rejected Ali and there was nothing left to protect.
X The current Quran is recited in multiple ways (Afs and Warsh, right? Sunnis add ahruf etc). What is the shia view of this? Was it Othman's order that lead to the compilation/standardization of the Quran? If so, how does that work?
X why is it that the Shias have pics depicting the imams and the Sunnis don't? I used to recognize polytheism by their tendency to make pics/statues of religious figures.
X how does imamah work in the case of an apolitical imam? If actual leadership of the ummah is not nrcesary, such as Ali ibn Hussein, why make a fuss about Ali' s right to lead?

>>20582221
Fatima was the last of her siblings to die so relatively not young. Ali died in power, assassinated like his two predecessors. His sons were handling things with a new generation, not the original follower of Muhammad

>>20582652
Off the top of my head there are several instances of a 'mysterious man' appearing out of nowhere when some high profile jurist was going to make a ruling that was going to be horribly wrong, presenting evidence or convincing him otherwise. There was also a 'mysterious man' called Jola that appeared and gave a scholar gnostic/sufi intructions and then disappeared. The scholar first thought he was dealing with a madman but realized how wrong he was. To this day the gnostic and meditative practices taught in Qom seminaries go back to this man. There is more to the story of this 'Jola'. Some sources narrate that he was a companion of the Hidden Imam.

>>20582858
Of course I can't speak on his behalf but perhaps because she was humiliated enough and that was enough punishment for her? And she stopped all of her subversive political activities after her defeat for the rest of her life, so on a practical level there was no need.

This is what the Book of Sulaym narrates that Imam Ali did after Umar did what he did.
"At this moment Ali sprang up, grabbed Umar by the collar, flung him to the ground, and began hitting him violently in the face and neck, actually seeking to kill him. But then he recalled the last words which the Prophet had uttered secretly to him and said, ‘By Him who ennobled Muhammad by prophecy, O son of Sahhak [the mother of Umar], were it not for the destiny which God has foreseen [for this community] and were it not for the oath which the Messenger made me swear, I would not have left you alive and you know it all too well.’"
Note that Umar's threats to Fatima are also recorded in Sunni sources. So the dispute is only about whether or not he acted on his threats.

I'll give you a narration for this.
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/8/1/453/453

Cont.

>>20582858
Shias use the hafs recitation which goes back to Imam Ali. The issue of the collection of the Quran is very messy, both for Sunnis and Shias. As you know, there are narrations in Sunni sahih sources saying the Quran is incomplete. Aisha saying a goat ate a page of the Quran, or Umar saying there was some law in the Quran that was not recorded. Furthermore when Uthman enforced his collection of the Quran, there were two other codices in circulation among people. These were the codices of Ibn Mas'ud and Ubay ibn Ka'b. When Uthman enforced his compilation, all the copies of these were burned. There was of course the codex that Imam Ali compiled by himself, which Umar and Uthman rejected so he withdrew it and didn't make it available to the public. The codex of Ali, according to the Imams, was inherited by each Imam from the previous one. On the one hand, all the Imams starting from Imam Ali confirmed the authenticity of the Uthmanic codex and instructed the Shia to use it, but on the other hand there are narrations in Shia sources suggesting that the Uthmanic codex is censored by the caliphs, even quoting some of the censored parts. Also the quotations that remain from the Ibn Mas'ud and ibn Ka'b have parts that are not included in the Uthmanic contenxt. This issue controversial within Shi'ism though, with the vast majority of Shias claiming that the Quran is complete while a minority holding otherwise. Of course it begs the question, why did the caliphs reject Ali's mushaf? At any rate, all Shias agree that the Quran is purely the word of God, as the Imams said. The point is Uthman forced his codex on everyone else by burning the other ones in circulation.

There is a difference of opinion among Shia scholars as to whether or not depicting the faces of the Prophet and his family is permissible. If its done tastefully and respectfully, I myself see nothing wrong with it. Pic related is my favorite portrait of Imam Ali, I really like it. Of course it does not mean it's historically accurate, and it does not mean I worship it (lol astaghfirullah). It's just a nice artistic depiction of him which allows one to contemplate their devotion to him.

The Imams inherit the spiritual as well as the temporal authority of the Prophet. If people stop following the Imam, it does not mean his authority is taken away. Just as in the Meccan period when people were disobeying the Prophet, he still held authority over them by God's command. It is true that after the martyrdom of Imam Husayn the Imams distanced themselves from politics and focused on spiritual matters. It does not mean however that they do not hold authority over people. It means that it is only Shias who recognize this authority.

>>20582197
>>20582908
Of course, you conveniently forget that Abu Bakr took away Fatima's inheritance from her. According to Sunni sources no less. So much for 'taking care of them'.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3092
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3767

The Qur'an states Allah preserved it, so why should we even consider reports that contradict the claim?

It seems to me that hypothetically if one were given the Qur'an, one would be able to reach Heaven solely on its teachings. If we are to take the claim that the Quran is a Guidance, then it should follow that everything is to be judged by its standard. Although "Quranist" is thrown as a derogatory term on people, it is quite crazy to think that one who upholds the Quran in its highest esteem is on the wrong path. The problem with narrations and convoluted explanations, or historical accounts is that you have as many versions of events and claims as you have people of Earth.

For example, if I am to take the accounts of Shias about Ali, the Prophet is a side character, as if practically, Ali was the divine man, and the Prophet was there just to confirm it. Look at Kitab Al Irshad"s account of Ali in the different battles. Ali is depicted as a one man army, the Prophet just needs to ask for his help to win a battle. Why should I believe this? Do understand I am from a Shia background, so I'm not trying to belittle the sect, but I am trying to be critical.

The Sunnis throw insults because of the Shia claim of the infallability of the imams, but practically, they believe in the infallability of the companions, and follow the traditions of Umar on many accounts, not that of the Prophet. I find Sunni Islam to be almost void of spirituality. There's not much in the hadith that points to it. I might be wrong though. This is also my experience with those of that branch. Maybe it is the salafi influence that stripped it away from the masses. It feels like you're just here to snatch points for the afterlife, with no sincerity or humanity attached to it.

At this point the arguments and counter-arguments I have heard them on almost all points of contention, and it goes nowhere. Is there no alternative? Are we stuck with this eternal set of points and counter-points?

Hassan Al Malki is a breath of fresh air, but I'm not sure what's going on with him with the Saudi jail thing.

Bump, any based personalities that talk about this issue?

>>20584280
Yes, in 15:9 Qur'an says God preserves the Qur'an, but what is exactly the nature of this preservation, and which Qur'an does He preserve? We should be careful not read our assumptions into the text. Could it not just as well be that the full Qur'an was preserved in the mushaf of Ali, which was handed down to the Imams after him and ultimately to the 12th Imam? Thus Imamate becomes the means by which the Qur'an is preserved. If you want to be critical about it, there are a lot of questions to ask here. First of all, why did Imam Ali fully dedicate himself during the months following the death of the Prophet to compiling his mushaf, even though he knew the caliphs were doing the same thing? And again, why did Umar and Uthman reject his text? Could we even trust these two to faithfully record everything in the Qur'an, even when it goes against themselves? And why did Uthman forcefully burn all the copies of Ibn Mas'ud and Ibn Ka'b? Finally, why are there narrations both in Sunni and Shia sources saying that the Uthmanic text is incomplete? You see what I mean when I say it's a messy situation. If you want to read more about it, read "Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur'an" by Hossein Modarressi (linked below), and also chapter 3.3 of the Divine Guide and chapter 2 of the Silent and Speaking Qur'an by Amir-Moezzi. He also has a lecture on it.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1595789
https://sci-hub.se/10.2307/1595789
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0j-7QA-pgAA

True, the Qur'an says it is a Clear Guide. In affirming tawheed it is remarkably clear. No one who reads this book could have any doubt in its affirmation of monotheism. However, in many other respects it is not so clear. Just compare the tafsirs from different groups. There is so much each branch disagree on, not to mention the individual scholars within each branch. When there is so much confusion we can't just say the book is altogheter clear. If it was clear, then there wouldn't have been so much disagreement. When the Qur'an calls itself a clear guide, it means as a guide towards monotheism, in which, as I said, it is remarkably clear. I don't really think you could use the Qur'an as a standalone guide. The Qur'an tells you to pray salat before the dawn, and during the evening and the night, but it doesn't tell you how many rak'ahs you are supposed to pray. It tells you to pay zakat, but it doesn't tell you how much you're supposed to pay. It tells you to do Hajj, but it doesn't tell you how many times you are supposed to walk around the Ka'bah. We learn about these either through the Prophet or the Imams. If you took away these two, you wouldn't be able to know how exactly you are supposed to perform these actions, and you wouldn't know what is the correct interpretation of the Qur'an. This itself points to the necessity of Imamate.

Cont.

>>20584280
Hypothetically, you don't even need the Qur'an to go to heaven. As 2:62 says, the belief in God and the last day coupled with good deads is enough for salvation, you don't even need to be a Muslim. But this shouldn't be our only goal. We should strive to serve God as best and as fully as we can. This of course includes, as 4:59 says, obeying 'those with authority among us', ie the Imams.

This isn't a fair characterization in my opinion. Obviously if you read a book about Imam Ali, the Prophet is going to be the side character, and if you read a book about the Prophet, Imam Ali is going to be the side character. This is just common sense, and you're reading about Imam Ali in al-Irshad. During the battles the Prophet was more concerned with strategically directing and overseeing the army rather than engaging in the fight itself (although he didn't shy away from when the situation required it). Imam Ali on the other hand, as agreed on by both Sunni and Shia sources, was the exceptional warrior of Islam. It's not true that he was capable of singlehandledly winning any battle, but it's true that he was a key fighter in each battle. Also, during the battle of Uhud, when the Muslims deserted the Prophet, at one point it was only Imam Ali remaining by his side and protecting him against the Meccans, until some of the Muslims returned. Read the sections on the battles in Sobhani's The Message (I linked above in the reading list). He uses Sunni sources to show Imam Ali's depiction in these battles isn't just a Shia exagerration.

You are right that Sunnism in its ordinary form is devoid of spirituality. The spirituality in Sunnism survived in the form of Sufism, which ironically enough, goes back to the Shia Imams. I recommend looking at Imam Sajjad's book Sahifa al-Sajjadia for a precious example of Shi'i spirituality.

Honestly, to me Imamate is clear as day. If it weren't for the Imams, Islam would not have been able to survive. The sacrifice of Imam Husayn saved Islam from becoming a plaything of the politicians. Even outside Shi'ism, the Imams are responsible for so much contribution to Islam. Abu Hanifa and Malik ibn Anas were students of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, and as we know Sufism goes back to the Imams. If you look at each of them individually, they were exemplary pious people. Even if you don't want to believe they were divinely inspired, each Imam has a perfect chain of transmission of teachings from his fathers going back to Imam Ali and the Prophet. Through them we can get the best possible rulings of Sharia, and again, whether in Sufism or Shi'ism, the Imams are the only genuine source of spirituality within Islam. I assume you are familiar with the hadith of the Prophet recorded not only in Shia sources, but also Bukhari and Muslim, about the 12 caliphs succeeding him? Is this not a clear proof?
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7222
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821a
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821b

>>20584280

Hypothetically, you don't even need the Qur'an to go to heaven. As 2:62 says, the belief in God and the last day coupled with good deads is enough for salvation, you don't even need to be a Muslim. But this shouldn't be our only goal. We should strive to serve God as best and as fully as we can. This of course includes, as 4:59 says, obeying 'those with authority among us', ie the Imams. This hadith is important here:
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/4/64/1

This isn't a fair characterization in my opinion. Obviously if you read a book about Imam Ali, the Prophet is going to be the side character, and if you read a book about the Prophet, Imam Ali is going to be the side character. This is just common sense, and you're reading about Imam Ali in al-Irshad. During the battles the Prophet was more concerned with strategically directing and overseeing the army rather than engaging in the fight itself (although he didn't shy away from when the situation required it). Imam Ali on the other hand, as agreed on by both Sunni and Shia sources, was the exceptional warrior of Islam. It's not true that he was capable of singlehandledly winning any battle, but it's true that he was a key fighter in each battle. Also, during the battle of Uhud, when the Muslims deserted the Prophet, at one point it was only Imam Ali remaining by his side and protecting him against the Meccans, until some of the Muslims returned. Read the sections on the battles in Sobhani's The Message (I linked above in the reading list). He uses Sunni sources to show Imam Ali's depiction in these battles isn't just a Shia exagerration.

You are right that Sunnism in its ordinary form is devoid of spirituality. The spirituality in Sunnism survived in the form of Sufism, which ironically enough, goes back to the Shia Imams. I recommend looking at Imam Sajjad's book Sahifa al-Sajjadia for a precious example of Shi'i spirituality.

Honestly, to me Imamate is clear as day. If it weren't for the Imams, Islam would not have been able to survive. The sacrifice of Imam Husayn saved Islam from becoming a plaything of the politicians. Even outside Shi'ism, the Imams are responsible for so much contribution to Islam. Abu Hanifa and Malik ibn Anas were students of Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq, and as we know Sufism goes back to the Imams. If you look at each of them individually, they were exemplary pious people. Even if you don't want to believe they were divinely inspired, each Imam has a perfect chain of transmission of teachings from his fathers going back to Imam Ali and the Prophet. Through them we can get the best possible rulings of Sharia, and again, whether in Sufism or Shi'ism, the Imams are the only genuine source of spirituality within Islam. As you know, the Prophet has said, both in Shia and Sunni sources, that 12 righteous caliphs will succeed him. Is this not a clear proof?
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7222
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821a
https://sunnah.com/muslim:1821b

That's cool, Bateman, but can anyone recommend good books on Persian history and culture? Bonus points if they contain additional information on traditional wrestling.

What is really interesting is that virtually all sufi sunni orders have one of the Twelve imams as their patron saint (I'm oversimplifying, but their initiatic chain goes back to either Ali, Hussein, Hassan and Jaffar as Sadiq). A twelver friend of mine talked to sufis from the Kacimiyya about the deep mystical stuff and was legit shocked kek, he thought these guys were crypto-shia.

My personal belief is that Shia are basically sufi that became overtly politicized in favor of Ali.

>>20582500
>>20582502
>>20582561
Alright, thank you brother/sister. These will occupy me for some time. Salam.

A lot of it stems from contrary values. Sunnis see Ali as a fearless warrior, the Achilles of the Muslims who slew his foes unstoppable and burned homosexuals. Shia see Ali as a victim, bullied, pushed around, unable to defend his family but forgiving and nice and wouldn’t hurt a fly despite praising his enemies to avoid being hurt by them Each represents a particular ideal.

>>20582133
>I feel like the truth is in between the 2 perspectives.
>le both sides are wrong and right
The most reddit take possible

>>20582133
Mut'ah, blatant shirk (even lay shias calling upon imams), hatred (cursing the companions and the prophet's wives), the prophet marrying and being especially loving of Aisha (irrespective of the metric tons of cope that this sparks), as well as the final nail in the coffin, the fact that Ali married his daughter to Omar is unironically all you need to see that wherever the truth is, it's clearly not with the Shia

>>20582147
Fpbp

>>20584731
According to Shias Ali had compiled a Quran that the caliphs rejected, is this also a claim found within the sunni traditions?

Wouldn't the sunnis argue that the burning was done in order to make sure no faulty copies or whatever were still around?

What if the specifics were not mentioned because the specifics in the Quran are not really the point of the message? Whom did you actually learn fasting and salat from? My parents, and I bet the generations before them also passed down the ritual without ever opening a book of hadith on how to pray.

The imams being pious and knowledgable is one thing, but as you know the issue is wether they occupy those divine positions.

Who were the Imams between Jesus and Muhammad?

What are the actual roots of Sufism? They dIdn't consider the imams to be what the Shias claim them to be though, right?

Imammah sounds logical in some aspects, but the clear designation of such a position as prophethood is in the quran is not present in the Quran and this is probably my main concern relating to it. It is a grand claim, especially if you espouse that they are of a higher position that Prophets and that 12 of them came after the final prophet.

>>20586049

meaning that each sect has a part of the truth, not that both are categorically wrong and right. Whag a reddit way to simplify a statement.

>>20586074

I'll give you the shia responses

>Mutah was banned by Umar, the verse is available in the Quran
>the sunnis are ok with calling on people as intermediates, not as independent beings to be worshipped. Don't take medecine bro, its shirk, isn't God the one who cures?
>why is it wrong to curse people who commit evil? Aisha defied the Quranic orders calling women to not cause shenanigans it the public sphere
>Aisha was Jelly of Khadija, look at your hadith, not sure why you think she was more dear to him.
>Probably a fabrication or something

>>20582133
>debating different flavours of shit
All is vanity

>>20587281
>is this also a claim found within the sunni traditions?
Indeed it is. Read the article by Modarressi I cited above. He gives the citations.

>Wouldn't the sunnis argue that the burning was done in order to make sure no faulty copies or whatever were still around?
Yes, but the problem is Imam Ali is mentioned by name in those codices as the successor to the Prophet. For example, 5:67 was recorded by Ibn Mas'ud in this way: "O Messenger, deliver whatever has been sent down to you by your Lord that Ali is mawla of the faithful." Again I refer you to that article above. These are all found in Sunni sources, mind you. Would Uthman have allowed such a verse to be included in his text?

>What if the specifics were not mentioned because the specifics in the Quran are not really the point of the message?
The problem with Qur'anism is that the early Muslims did not regard the Qur'an as a standalone guide. They always referred the verses to the sayings of the Prophet for clarification. The first time in Islamic history the idea of 'Qur'an alone' was introduced was by Umar on the Prophet's deathbed. The Prophet told them to write down a will for him so that they will not go astray after he dies. Umar prevented this, he said the Prophet is delirious and "the book of God suffices us" (see the hadith below). It's very important to contemplate the significance of this event. Why did he want his will written down, and why did Umar in particular object to it? After that the idea was adopted by the khawarij when they rebelled against Imam Ali, and finally assassinated him. How could then Qur'anism be a good thing if it has such evil origins?
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:114

>Whom did you actually learn fasting and salat from? My parents, and I bet the generations before them also passed down the ritual without ever opening a book of hadith on how to pray.
The problem with this reasoning is the majority of Shias also believe in Imamate because it was passed down to them by their parents. They also never opened a book of hadith. Could they justify their belief in just the same way? Why make a line between how beliefs are passed down and how the rituals are?

>The imams being pious and knowledgable is one thing, but as you know the issue is wether they occupy those divine positions.
Yes, but my point was their lives and actions live up to these high standards.

>Who were the Imams between Jesus and Muhammad?
We have a list of the names in our sources:
Jesus —— Simeon (Sham‘un) —— John (Yahya) —— Mundhir b. Sham‘un — Salama (or Salima) — Barda (or Barza or Balit or Abi)
Note that Imamate need not always be explicit. It can be hidden or open depending on the age. This is why we don't know much about some of them.

Cont.

>>20587281
>What are the actual roots of Sufism? They dIdn't consider the imams to be what the Shias claim them to be though, right?
They accept the spiritual walayah of the Imams but they don't accept their legal authority. Then again, historically Sufis have had a turbulent relation with the legal side of Islam, so there is something to be said about how much they actually care about that anyway. As for the roots, see this article:
https://sci-hub.se/10.2307/20004827

>Imammah sounds logical in some aspects, but the clear designation of such a position as prophethood is in the quran is not present in the Quran and this is probably my main concern relating to it.
If you are the person who I talked to sometime ago, did you read the dissertation I linked?

>especially if you espouse that they are of a higher position that Prophets
The reason they are above the Prophets other than Muhammad is because they inherit the authority of Muhammad, and Muhammad was superior to all other Prophets. The Qur'an says in 17:55 "We indeed favored some of the prophets over others."

>and that 12 of them came after the final prophet.
Why is this a problem again when the Prophet said there will be 12 of them both in Sunni and Shia sources?

>>20585962
Wa alaykumu s-salam. You're very welcome anon. If you had questions at any time, feel free to ask.

finally a Muslim thread that did not get derailed >>20582502
Thanks for keeping it informative brother. I will give these links sometime

>>20587809
You do understand that you're telling me the Word of God was not preserved in its entity, but that the word of men was preserved under political turmoil? And that you trust the statements of men over the statements of God? How was Ali successful in his Imamah if the Quran was lost because the caliphs rejected his copy?? That is all that it took? Why is it that God permited the dessimination of doubtful verses in the presence of an Imam (who's leadership and role is now put in doubt by your own statement)? How does a most unique copy of the Quran (existence is debated) kept by a hidden Imam (whose existence is debated) a guide to mankind, a clear Book, a Book that removes doubt, the criterion.If anything, your worldview seemed to be built around rumors. You're willing to believe in the corruption of the Quran in order to polish the corruption of pthe priesthood. How does that work? God failed to deliver his message, but men were successful in telling us God failed?? Do understand that as a pronciple I would reject the hadith from sunnis that claim verses were lost or such statements, so that fact they have this in their books isn't a "proof". After all, is it difficult to chose between Abu Huraira and Allah?

You're saying Umar was a Quranite, however the Quran says listen to what the Prophet tells you and don't raise your voices over him. It could be argued that Umar's statement is similar to yours, since you take the Quran lightly. The clamity of thursday shines upon the foolishness of some of the companions, but it does not reveal the content of what it is that he wanted to tell us, nor does it make sense to assume a few companions were able to stop the Prophet from delivering his message. It is tempting to fill in the blanks but this only leads to a biased construct. The hadith of the 12 caliphs doesn't reveal the 12 imams of the Shia, since most were not caliphs, and as you said were apolitical. They did not rule over people. The hadith also doesn't say you have to follow them, nor that they are divine, nor that they are.infallible.

Is it hard to see why I wrote what I wrote in OP? Am I the only one who sees the issues? Btw don't take offense if some of my statements come across like that, I'm just being sincere in my feelings.

I gave a more in-depth explanation here of Sunnism representing more Achilles ideals and Shiasm as more Odysseus and this leading to the major rift between the sects
>>20588469

>>20589239
I know Muslims love to feel outraged about everything, but you need to understand this is not place for that. I am just introducing different perspectives. It's not my fault there is evidence Uthman censored the book of God. I have already told you the majority of Shias do not accept this. As for myself, I think few things about early Islam can be said with certainty. Still, I can't "unsee" the evidence, so I take it into perspective. Even if the Qur'an was suppressed by the caliphs, the Imams were not bothered as they believed it still relayed the message. "They desire to extinguish the Light of God with their mouths. But God refuses to do aught but complete His Light, though the disbelievers be averse." (Q. 9:32).

>You're saying Umar was a Quranite
I said the idea was first introduced by him, and I provided textual evidence. He says in the hadith quite literally that "God's book suffices us." Again, it's not my fault Umar was a hypocrite.

>The hadith of the 12 caliphs doesn't reveal the 12 imams of the Shia, since most were not caliphs, and as you said were apolitical.
I already said above the Imams had authority over the believers even if the believers did not know. Read this hadith of Imam Reza very carefully. It will be good for your soul.
https://thaqalayn.net/chapter/11/2/20

>>20582133
Muhammad definitely meant to give the caliphate to Ali, that much is near indisputable. I don't know where all this 12 demigod imam shit comes from though.

>>20589871
No, no one in his right mind thinks he intended to give leadership of an extremely tribal and elder based society to someone in his 20’s especially when he appointed his best friend and peer in age, Abu Bakr (not Ali), to lead the prayers when he no longer could, considering leading the prayers was the office of the leader and the office is even designated imam

>>20589919
Ali was in his 30s which was the typical age of the historical prophets. Jesus was I believe in his early 30s when he died.

>>20589846
I'm not sure why you bring Muslim outrage into this, I'm saying that your statements bring about grave consequences to the theology, and you seem to be ok with downgrading the sacrednes of the Book in order to not tarnish the a particular priestly class.

The Imams are not bothered by us following the wrong verses. So we crossed out their role as political figures, and now we cross out their roles of being teachers since they seem ok with us reciting verses the wrong way.In the same way, so much for their role of preservers of the message.

The idea of the Quran is to be upholded comes from God. It is as if the Prophet follows al Kafi or Bukhari. Truely people have abandoned it. People are giving lip service to it, because if they had to actually read the verses as a book coherent to itself, they would have to abandon their theories and personalities. This is apparent. A form of idol worship? I'm not sure.

>>20589937
Early thirties maybe. Prophets could be even younger, ‘Ibrahim عليه السلام was an adolescent. Of course ‘Ali رضي الله عنه was not a prophet, he wasn’t someone being given words and guidance directly from Allah عز وخل. So setting him or an adolescent in charge of a state comprised of tribes which are lead by elders seems dubious. He did marry Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وسلم daughter رضي الله عنها but don’t did Abu Bakr and ‘Umar رضي الله عنهما, and the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم married Abu Bakr’s daughter A’isha رضي الله عنهما

>>20590078
But *so did Abu Bakr and Umar رضي الله عنهما

>>20590054
You seem not to have read what I wrote. I said I don't particularly reject nor accept it, but I think it's an important perspective to take into account. You can either make an effort to understand Shi'ism, or you can continue to attack your strawmans. Either way it has no bearing on me. I said again, according to this thesis, there are no "wrong verses" in the text, but incomplete ones. You seem to be bent on attacking my relationship with the Qur'an. Know that there is nothing dearer in my possession than this book. I try to read it every day, and during the course of this conversation I quoted it plenty of times. You should know your accusations will have consequences for you in the presence of God. "And whosoever commits an offense or a sin, and then casts it upon one who is innocent, bears the burden of calumny and a manifest sin." (Q. 4:112)

>>20590090

Perhaps I have not understood your position.

You're also not understanding where I'm coming from. I'm not attacking you, but rather I'm proposing that the consequences of those ideas are destructive to the cohesiveness of the religion. I will admit that it made me think about the people of the Book and some other things about Islam. I have saved the links and books you provided, so I'll take a look at them. Again, don't take my comments as personal attacks, it wasn't my intention.

Here's a follow up question. I'm not familiar with Shia hadith much. Are sunni hadith like thaqalain, kisa, etc available as they are in the Shia books? What do the Sunnis use as criteria to reject the Shia hadith? Do they actually have hadith from the Shia imams, or did they outright reject quoting from them?

When they say Malik and abu hanjfa were students of Jafar asSadiq, do they mean just among the general students, or were they close to him? What is the explanation as to why they don't teach what Shias teach?

>>20591046
I understand where you come from, but I don't think this issue causes any problems within Shi'ism when the intricate relationship between the Imam and the Qur'an is properly understood. No offense taken.
>>20591258
Yes, they are all found in our books, often elaborating on them, explaining them, or giving a fuller version. In Sunni rijal works under the names of known Shia narrators it is written this person has Shi'i leanings, avoid his narrations. In Bukhari and Muslim there are very few hadiths of Imam Baqir and Imam Sadiq (maybe less than 10?), even though they were their contemporaries and were prolific and respected narrators. Sunnis try to come up with various copes, saying they related 'weak' narrations. There are also a quite a lot of hadiths from Imam Ali belittling himself and then praising Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman, in that order. Or hadiths that make him look dumb or frivolous. They narrate hadiths from Imam Ja'far proudly boasting that through his mother he is related to Abu Bakr (the father of his mother is Qasim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Abu Bakr, who was a very close and devoted Shia of Imam Sajjad and Imam Baqir, so Imam Baqir chose to marry his daughter. Sunnis keep bringing this up unaware that it reflects poorly upon them that Abu Bakr's own grandson was a devout Shia). They also have hadiths where the Imam curses a close disciple of his for rejecting Abu Bakr and Umar. If you look at Tarikh al-Tabari, you will see that the practice of fabricating hadiths against Shias started very early, in fact with Mu'awiya. Al-Tabari narrates this from Mu'awiya addressed to his governor al-Mughira:
"I would continue to advise you about a quality of yours- do not refrain from abusing ‘Ali and criticizing him, not from asking God’s mercy upon Uthman and His forgiveness for him. Continue to shame the companions of ‘Ali, keep at a distance, and don’t listen to them. Praise the faction of Uthman, bring them near, and listen to them."
Al-Tabari, vol. 18, page 123
https://books.google.com/books?id=s5iBlLUfi_YC&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q=Abuse%20ali&f=false

The Imams had exoteric teachings addressed to the public, and esoteric teachings addressed to their elite companions. They did not think everyone has the spiritual and intellectual capacity to become a Shia. Malik and Abu Hanifa belonged to the former.

>>20591681
Is there a reason as to why wew don't hear much from the words of some of the Imams? You usually hear stuff from the first 8, again I'm gooig on my readings here and there, so I might be wrong.

Thanks btw, I appreciate your time.

There's also the names of the Imams in Masjid Nabawi, what's the explanation for that? Are the sunnis just unaware of this? I was also surprised to know that at one point. What are the origins?

>>20582147
>Look into the Zaydis; they're Shias who believe in the Imams
their concept of imam is completely different

>>20584754
Why do persians draw these arabs as persians?

>>20591681
>Tarikh al-Tabari
schizo book that's just a collection of previous historical works by both shia and sunnis

>>20591837
>There's also the names of the Imams in Masjid Nabawi, what's the explanation for that
medina and mecca were ruled by shia Hashemites until they converted to Sunni islam during the Ottoman period

>>20591837
Most of the Imams after the martyrdom of Imam Husayn lived under heavy surveillance and pressure from Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs, who were deeply afraid of their influence. Imam al-Hadi and Imam Askari (10th and 11th Imams) spent most of their Imamate imprisoned, mostly just communicating with Shias through letters (I remember reading a hadith from a guard who was astounished that when the Imam was left alone he thanked God for giving him an opportunity to dedicate himself solely to prayer and did not tire of constantly praying). The situation was better for Imam Baqir and Imam Sadiq since their Imamate coincided with the last years of the Umayyads and the early years of Abbassids. The caliphs were busy with themselves and did not pay much attention to the Alids, so these two Imams were able to teach relatively freely. Most of our narrations come from these two Imams, although there are a good number of narrations from the other ones as well.

As far as I know the names of the Imams were put on Masjid Nabawi's walls during the Ottoman era when the Sufi influence was strong. I don't know why the Saudis haven't taken them down but I consider it divine providence. They have made little edits though, taking out the عليه السلام after their names and shortening Imam Mahdi's name for some reason.

>>20592103
Cope.

>>20592131
how am I coping. Al Tabari's history is just a collection of previous historical works with some of his own commentary

I mean when a non Muslim reads Muslim history everyone but Ali see.s like an asshole

>>20582133
>I feel like the truth is in between the 2 perspectives
Good news anon you'll like the sect I start that will become the major sect followed by a majority of Muslims within my grandchildren's lifetime.

>>20585962
>sister
There are no hijabi muslimas posting on 4channel.org

>>20593371
There was actually one who posted about a year ago or so. She got into an argument with a brown muslim man who kept calling her a dumb bitch and telling her women shouldn't go to university and she was telling him he will go to hell because he shaves his beard. It was a surreal, almost comical exchange.

>>20593406
I have no witty reply that's pretty funny though. But my point isn't necessarily that it's impossible that one could post here, but there aren't deranged female Muslimah NEETs on here or something.

Bump

bump

When you mention that he taught Malik and Abu Hanifa the non-esoteric stuff, would that Include the fact that they are a chosen imam?

>>20595801
Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq used to give open public lectures that were attended by hundreds of scholars, including Abu Hanifa and Malik. This doesn't mean these two were close to him or had his blessings by any means. In fact, Imam Ja'far directly told Abu Hanifa to stop using Qiyas (analogical reasoning) in deriving legal rulings, which the Imam said is a satanic method, although Abu Hanifa didn't listen to him. In another hadith his son Imam Musa al-Kazim harshly criticizes Abu Hanifa for using Qiyas.
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/2/19/20
https://thaqalayn.net/hadith/1/2/19/13

>>20595899
Who is the Holy Spirit in Shia Islam supposed to be? Does it guide and comfort people like in the Christian understanding? Is it a part of God or a part of God's attributes? Can you make this clear please? Thanks anon.

>>20596566

It refers to Gabriel, the Angel who delivers messages from God to his prophets. The Sunnis understand it as so too. Unless you are refering to something else.

>>20596566
The anon >>20596869 is on the surface correct but Shi'ism has a more elaborate understanding. I'll explain in a while.

In short, yes the Holy Spirity in Shi'ism has similarities to the Christian view but I would say it's more similar to the Platonist view. To understand the Imams' view of the Spirit we need to understand their view of God and the Word as well. Regarding God, the Imams were very clear in having an apophatic view of Him and and establishing that God has no parts or atributtes. In the words of Imam Ali:

"The first step in religion is knowledge of Him. The perfection of knowledge of Him is to confirm Him. The perfection of confirming Him is to profess His unity. The perfection of professing His Unity is sincerity towards Him. And the perfection of sincerity towards Him is to negate attributes from Him, because of the testimony of every attribute that it is not that which possesses the attribute and the testimony of everything that possesses attributes that it is not the attribute. So whoso describes God—glory be to Him—has given Him a partner. Whoso gives Him a partner has declared Him to be two. Whoso declares Him to be two has divided Him. Whoso divides Him is ignorant of Him. Whoso is ignorant of Him points to Him. Whoso points to Him has delimited Him. Whoso delimits Him has numbered Him. Whoso says, 'In what is He ?', has enclosed Him. Whoso says, 'On what is He ?', has excluded Him (from certain things). He is a being not as the result of temporal origin, an existent not having come from nonexistence. He is with everything, not through association; and He is other than everything, not through separation. ... He originated creation and gave to it its beginning without employing deliberation, profiting from experience, without occasioning movement, or without being disrupted by the cares of the soul."

It's important to understand how, from this absoluteness of unity, creation comes about. The Qur'an says: "And Our Word unto a thing, when We desire it, is only to say to it, 'Be!' and it is" (Q. 40:16). God creates with his Word; the divine expression of "Be!" is the creative act. There is a famous hadith constantly quoted by Sufis as well as Shia philosophers and mystics. The Prophet says, "the first thing God created was my Intellect," and he also says, "the first thing God created was my Light." Thus, after the Unity comes the creative act, which is the same thing as as the Word, the Intellect, and the Muhammadan light. This light contains in itself not only the true being of Muhammad, but also of Ali, Fatima, and the other eleven Imams. This is the Light that was carried by each Prophet throughout every age. This light is at the same time God's expression of himself—the Face of God (Q. 2:115)— and on the other hand it is the pre-existence of the Imams. It is the Imam par excellence, what some scholars call the Ontological Imam. It roughly corresponds to the Logos in Christianity and the Intellect in Platonism.

Cont.

>>20596566
In short, yes the Holy Spirity in Shi'ism has similarities to the Christian view but I would say it's more similar to the Platonist view. To understand the Imams' view of the Spirit we need to understand their view of God and the Word as well. Regarding God, the Imams were very clear in having an apophatic view of Him and and establishing that God has no parts or attributes. In the words of Imam Ali about God:

"The first step in religion is knowledge of Him. The perfection of knowledge of Him is to confirm Him. The perfection of confirming Him is to profess His unity. The perfection of professing His Unity is sincerity towards Him. And the perfection of sincerity towards Him is to negate attributes from Him, because of the testimony of every attribute that it is not that which possesses the attribute and the testimony of everything that possesses attributes that it is not the attribute. So whoso describes God—glory be to Him—has given Him a partner. Whoso gives Him a partner has declared Him to be two. Whoso declares Him to be two has divided Him. Whoso divides Him is ignorant of Him. Whoso is ignorant of Him points to Him. Whoso points to Him has delimited Him. Whoso delimits Him has numbered Him. Whoso says, 'In what is He ?', has enclosed Him. Whoso says, 'On what is He ?', has excluded Him (from certain things). He is a being not as the result of temporal origin, an existent not having come from nonexistence. He is with everything, not through association; and He is other than everything, not through separation. He is active, not in the sense of possessing movement and instruments. He was seeing when there was none of His creatures to be observed by Him. He was 'alone' when there was none with whom to be intimate and at whose loss to feel lonely. He originated creation and gave to it its beginning without employing deliberation, profiting from experience, without occasioning movement, or without being disrupted by the cares of the soul."

Cont.

>>20596566
It's important to understand how, from this absoluteness of unity, creation comes about. The Qur'an says: "And Our Word unto a thing, when We desire it, is only to say to it, 'Be!' and it is" (Q. 40:16). God creates with his Word; the divine expression of "Be!" is the creative act. There is a famous hadith constantly quoted by Sufis as well as Shia philosophers and mystics. The Prophet says, "the first thing God created was my Intellect," and he also says, "the first thing God created was my Light." Thus, after the Unity comes the creative act, which is the same thing as as the Word, the Intellect, and the Muhammadan light. This light contains in itself not only the true being of Muhammad, but also of Ali, Fatima, and the other eleven Imams. This is the Light that was carried by each Prophet throughout every age. This light is at the same time God's expression of himself—the Face of God (Q. 2:115)— and on the other hand it is the pre-existence of the Imams. It is the Imam par excellence, what some scholars call the Ontological Imam. It roughly corresponds to the Logos in Christianity and the Intellect in Platonism.

Then we have the Holy Spirit. The Noble Qur'an says: "They ask thee about the Spirit. Say, 'The Spirit is from the Command of my Lord'" (Q. 17:85). The Spirit therefore comes from the Command of God, meaning from the Word, the Light. The Spirit is that through which God creates Adam: "And [remember] when thy Lord said unto the angels, 'Behold! I am creating a human being from dried clay, made of molded mud so when I have proportioned him and *breathed into him of My Spirit*, fall down before him prostrating." The Spirit is the intermediary of God through the Muhammadan light with the material world (dunya). In one sense, all the angels are instantiations of it, including the angel Gabriel who carries the revelations. The Spirit is that through which the Prophets and the Imams gain their knowledge. All prayers towards God are carried through it, and when God answers your prayers, it is through the Spirit that God answers it. It is that by which God guides the servants. Through the Holy Spirit, God 'inscribed faith' upon the heart of the believers and strengthened them (Q. 58:22).

Cont.

>>20596566
In light of all this, we can examine the verse of the Qur'an regarding Jesus, wherein God wants to establish the truth about Jesus: "Verily the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only a messenger of God, and *His Word*, which He committed to Mary, and *a Spirit from Him*" (Q. 4:171). So not only Jesus was a messenger, but he was God's Word and a Spirit from Him. This is the correct interpretation of Jesus in lieu of the Trinity. In equating God the Absolute Oneness with Jesus and the Spirit, Christians have committed the grave error of which the Qur'an speaks in Surat al-Ma'ida. However there is nothing wrong in Biblical verses such as John 14:16 (except for the use of 'father' in the translation). Jesus, similar to the other arch-Prophets and Imams, was a Theophany of God, not an incarnation. Shia theologians have emphasized the point that incarnationism seeks to bring down the absolute to the level of material, and thereby cuts off our access to God. If we understand Jesus and other arch-Prophets and Imams as theophanies who are connected to God through the Spirit and the Word, then we see they are a bridge for us to elevate ourselves towards God and through them seek closeness to Him. In this sense the world is of different layers: the absolute Oneness of God, then the Word (or the Light, the Intellect etc.), then the Spirit, and finally the material world. The Imams and the arch-Prophets are like a ladder for us through all these differernt layers. As the famous Shi'i expression goes, Ali is the gate to God. This goes for the other Imams and arch-Prophets including Jesus.

At any rate, such is my understanding of the teachings of the Imams. In the end God knows best.

>>20582133

>>20598576
Always wondered. Who drew this

>>20582133
Shia clerics have pretty strong Ijma' on transgenderism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_rights_in_Iran
You can search up the fatwas of each cleric, sistani, khomeini, khamenei, etc... on the matter. Khamenei just re-affirmed khomeinis fatwa, sistani believes transgenderism is fine, if we can truly implant a vagina on a man, but otherwise it isn't because the surgery would not be valid.

Also Shia ADS is dumb because it destroys the posibility of any form of predication since there is no analogy between man and totally transcendent/dissimilar Allah. This means that we can't know anything about Allah or to be from Allah (Quran).

For example, we can't affirm that God is honest in the Quran, because that would make him similar to us humans in some aspect sincer we can be or perceive of honesty. Making the Quran useless.

http://svgur.com/i/g2N.svg

>>20597665
All of Shiism is a cheap rip off of Christianity.

Imam Hussein is a christ like figure who sacrificed himself for the salvation of mankind. Only his "sacrifice" was him waging war and attempting to overthrow the ruler.

The crazy part is that, with Christ, we celebrate his crucifixation, since by the Cross he saved mankind. For 40 days we proclaim:
>Christ is risen from the dead, by death trampling down upon death, and to those in the tombs He has granted life
Shias for 40 days mourn and self-mutilate.

Shias snatched iconography also, only their icons are akin of indian anime/action movie style art, while we, Orthodox, have a solid tradition of iconography witch icons full of meaning and symbolism.

We wear a cross, they wear a split sword. etc... It's basically, a total scam that borrows solid concepts from Christianity to maximize appeal.

If you read Nahjul Balagha, Imam Ali, at different points, implies that he is not infallible, and no where does he claim infallibility. One example is pic related.

>>20582133
the western perspective on the conflict of the prophet and his companion is a mix between sunni and shia povs. the real story is so distorted and scattered among the hadith and history books . even if u gathered all the different pieces u still have half the story.
The quran on the other hand gives a shocking foreshadowing-prophecy of what actually hppened. it says that the majority of the people around the prophet are in it for the fame and it gave a last warning before the prophet died that they must repent or they will burn in hell. And also it gives a multiple stories about the assasination attempts that are wiped out from the history books (except few distorted stories).
the rabbit hole of the final days of the prophet life is very deep and exhausting to piece the scattered pieces

>>20599339
False. The first person who declared transgenderism permissible in Shi'im was the 20th century scholar Khomeini. His view was adopted by his successor Khamenei. Today the majority of Shias follow Sistani, who believes transgenderism today as westerners understand it is impermissible. He believes if medicine had allowed to truly change a person's sex and gender biologically, it would have been permissible; but as of now it is not. To recapitulate, most Shias through out history and most Shias living today have deemed transgenderism impermissible.

Divine Simplicity as taught by the Shia Imams is a far cry from the Sunni opinion which committs antropomorphism by ascribing to Him body parts. Glory be to God, He is free of what they ascribe to him. We can affirm that God is honest while keeping in mind honesty as applies to humans does not apply to God.

>>20599366
Shi'a Islam as the continuation and culmination of the Abrahamic tradition has similarities with the revealed religions before it. "He sent down the Book upon thee in truth, confirming what was before it, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel "(Q. 3:3). Sunnism on the other hand, as the subversion of the message of Muhammad by men of power, represents a true anti-Islam and a clean break with the prior religions. Shi'ism at the same time confirms aspects of Christianity while criticizes the others.

Imam Husayn's sacrifice had nothing do with political power. He was forced to fight because he resisted making an oath of allegiance to the evil caliphate.

Our sacred art is immensely beautiful. It is a continuation of the artistic tradition in Zoroastrianism and Manichaeism.
>>20599375
The Imams had exoteric teachings and esoteric teachings. We differentiate between their words to the public and to their close companions.

>>20599560
The Qur'anic verses on what happens in the absence of Moses after he leaves for Mount Sinai are illuminating:

"He said, 'Truly We tried thy people in thine absence, and the Samaritan led them astray.' Then Moses returned to his people, angry and aggrieved. He said, 'O my people! Did your Lord not make you a goodly Promise? Did the pact seem too long for you? Or did you desire that the anger of your Lord be unleashed upon you, such that you failed your tryst with me?' They said, 'We did not fail our tryst with thee of our own will, but we were laden with the burden of the people’s ornaments. So we cast them [into the pit], and thus did the Samaritan throw also.' Then he brought forth for them a calf as a mere body that lowed, and they said, 'This is your god and the god of Moses, though he has forgotten.' Have they not considered that it does not respond to them with words, and that it has no power over what harm or benefit may come to them? And Aaron had indeed said to them earlier, 'O my people! You are merely being tested by this, and truly your Lord is the Compassionate. So follow me and obey my command!' They said, 'We shall not cease to be its devotees till Moses returns unto us.' He said, 'O Aaron! What hindered thee, when thou didst see them going astray, that thou didst not follow me? Didst thou disobey my command?' He said, 'O son of my mother! Seize not my beard or my head. Truly I feared that thou wouldst say, ‘Thou hast caused division among the Children of Israel, and thou hast not heeded my word.’'" (Q. 20:85-94)

The comparison is even more remarkable when you consider that the Prophet Muhammad said Imam Ali is to him as Aaron was to Moses.
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:3706
https://sunnah.com/muslim:2404e

>>20599707
Forgot to say, the pic is a Safavid era depiction of Imam Ja'far from the book Falnama.

>>20599707
>False. The first person who declared transgenderism permissible in Shi'im was the 20th century scholar Khomeini. His view was adopted by his successor Khamenei.
That is precisely what I claimed. Modern Shiism is different from safavid or previous Shiism. So Modern Shiism starting with khomeini down is pro-transgenderism.
>He believes if medicine had allowed to truly change a person's sex and gender biologically, it would have been permissible; but as of now it is not.
Exactly what I said. Sistani believes that if we can artificially/medically alter a man to have female organs implanted and male organs removed, he would be legally recognized as a woman. Which is disgusting and LGBT. That's what any LGBT activist hopes for.

>Divine Simplicity as taught by the Shia Imams is a far cry from the Sunni opinion which committs antropomorphism by ascribing to Him body parts. Glory be to God, He is free of what they ascribe to him. We can affirm that God is honest while keeping in mind honesty as applies to humans does not apply to God.
If "honesty" when it refers to Allah is nothing like "honesty" the way we understand it, then the word "honesty" is as good as "oajiotu". It is meaningless. What does it mean for Allah to be "honest" if you give a definition, you contradict your position, if you don't then the word honesty is meaningless.

>Shi'a Islam as the continuation and culmination of the Abrahamic tradition has similarities with the revealed religions before it
Affirmations are not arguments. "We are in continuity with Abrhamic religions" is just an affirmation. One example of how Islam is based on post christian heretical beliefs is that Islamic circumcision is not Abrahamic, it's a pharisical tradition.
>In the mid-2nd century CE, the Tannaim, the successors of the newly ideologically dominant Pharisees, introduced and made mandatory a secondary step of circumcision known as the Periah.[3][7][8][4] Without it circumcision was newly declared to have no spiritual value.[8] This new form removed as much of the inner mucosa as possible, the frenulum and its corresponding delta from the penis, and prevented the movement of shaft skin, in what creates a "low and tight" circumcision.[3][16] It was intended to make it impossible to restore the foreskin.[3][7][8] This is the form practiced among the large majority of Jews today, and, later, became a basis for the routine neonatal circumcisions performed in the United States and other Anglosphere countries among non-Jews as well.[3][7][17] Today, brit milah is performed by a mohel on the eighth day after the infant's birth and is followed by a celebratory meal known as seudat mitzvah.[4]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brit_milah

>>20599948

>>20599707
Also you conveniently ignored the fatwa on molesting babies shared by almost all main Marajey (clerics)

>>20593278
Ali had sex slaves, was ISIS like, spoke of women like an incel, according to Shia hadiths. I will share a few.
>Women are lacking in faith because they have periods

1/3