Missing concept Of IMAMAT in Quran

Here i want to share something with my beloved readers from one of the online shia friend. I think this thread will help you to gain some excellent knowledge BUT YOU HAVE TO READ THIS THREAD VERY-VERY SINCERELY. Before everything i want to highlight some of his believes, which i observed from the past (may be some are wrong)

1. He believe that the Quran is preserved & same as that of sunni’s.

2. He believe that you can learn so much from the Quran just by watching the Taraweeh.

3. He respect sahaba’s because Quran respect sahaba’s.

4. Why ALLAH never showed any clear verse on imamat of 12 imams (which shia think is must of every believer, otherwise the one will be kafir), even ALLAH clearly defined the merits of sahaba’s! Then why not imamat?

My Assumption: I will quote the shia friend as F says; & other shia’s as O says:

Now lets start from the question he (F) asked (from where the discussion starts):

F says:

Something i’ve been curious with,
In surah al-Nisa, Allah(swt) lists a series of Prophets (pbut) then He(awj) says:
رُّسُلًا مُّبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ لِئَلَّا يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى اللَّـهِ حُجَّةٌ بَعْدَ الرُّسُلِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا
Messengers, givers of glad-tidings and warnings, so that mankind doesn’t have a proof (hujjah) against God after the messengers. And God is Mighty, Wise (4:165)

The Shia say that we need the Imams so that we can’t have a proof (hujjah) against Allah(swt).
However, this verse appears to say that Allah(swt) sent the messengers so that mankind wouldn’t have a hujjah against Him after the messengers.

How do we explain this?

i have a number of other questions about Imamate in the Quran as well, but this is the first one that has confused me.

Then ofcourse series of foolish replies started by other shia’s, the repliers not once tried to even read the question depth sincerely!

Let me quote some sample of replies:

O says:

Your translation is off. In fact where are you getting your translation from?

Shakir translation: (We sent) messengers as the givers of good news and as warners, so that people should not have a plea against Allah after the (coming of) messengers; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Nothing to do with no one coming after messengers, its to do with the itmaam of hujjah. The Prophet (pbuh) has done the itmaam of hujjah, through the annoucement at Ghadeer, and thus the Imams (as) are the hujjah on behalf of the Prophet (pbuh).

then F says:

Whatever translation you use, it means the same thing. Allah(swt) sent Messengers so that we have no plea/arguement/proof against Him.

So how can we say we need Imamate for this when Allah(swt) said He sent Messengers(pbut) for this?

then O says:

1. Read the context.

2. You have two options here: either rusul is to be understood in the general sense, and that includes Imams,

3. or the simple answer, we need Imams (as) because the Messenger (pbuh) who has been sent as a hujjat has ordered us to follow them.

then F says:

1. i have; many times:

إِنَّا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ كَمَا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ نُوحٍ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ مِن بَعْدِهِ ۚ وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَإِسْمَاعِيلَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ وَالْأَسْبَاطِ وَعِيسَىٰ وَأَيُّوبَ وَيُونُسَ وَهَارُونَ وَسُلَيْمَانَ ۚ وَآتَيْنَا دَاوُودَ زَبُورًا
[Shakir 4:163] Surely We have revealed to you as We revealed to Nuh, and the prophets after him, and We revealed to Ibrahim and Ismail and Ishaq and Yaqoub and the tribes, and Isa and Ayub and Yunus and Haroun and Sulaiman and We gave to Dawood Psalms.

وَرُسُلًا قَدْ قَصَصْنَاهُمْ عَلَيْكَ مِن قَبْلُ وَرُسُلًا لَّمْ نَقْصُصْهُمْ عَلَيْكَ ۚ وَكَلَّمَ اللَّـهُ مُوسَىٰ تَكْلِيمًا
[Shakir 4:164] And (We sent) messengers We have mentioned to you before and messengers we have not mentioned to you; and to Musa, Allah addressed His Word, speaking (to him):

رُّسُلًا مُّبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ لِئَلَّا يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى اللَّـهِ حُجَّةٌ بَعْدَ الرُّسُلِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا
[Shakir 4:165] (We sent) messengers as the givers of good news and as warners, so that people should not have a plea against Allah after the (coming of) messengers; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

لَّـٰكِنِ اللَّـهُ يَشْهَدُ بِمَا أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكَ ۖ أَنزَلَهُ بِعِلْمِهِ ۖ وَالْمَلَائِكَة ُ يَشْهَدُونَ ۚ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّـهِ شَهِيدًا
[Shakir 4:166] But Allah bears witness by what He has revealed to you that He has revealed it with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness (also); and Allah is sufficient as a witness.

2. How so? The verses only mentions messengers of God(swt) such as Moses(pbuh), Dawud(pbuh), etc.
Where in the entire Quran does Allah(swt) include the Imams in the meaning of “Rasul”?

3. How is it that al-Kulayni died the same year as the Greater Occultation began, yet his book isn’t filled with direct narrations either with the Imam or with his representatives?

O says:

There’s your answer. It is talking about previous communities.
Besides the next verse is very interesting, because it talks about the knowledge, which is in the book (6:63) which is in the Imam (13:43, 36:12)

F says:

What i mean to say is that how can the Shia say that there MUST be a hujjah on earth when Allah(swt) says that He sent the Messengers so that mankind would have NO argument against Him after the Messengers.

For example, if He didn’t send messengers, the people could say, “But God, you didn’t send us any Messengers”
But after the time of the Messengers, people can’t use that excuse because He sent Messengers to every group, so that people would have no argument against Him.

Besides, how exactly is Imam al-Mahdi a hujjah against us? When we have religious questions, do we ask him, or do we ask the scholars? When we pay khums, do we give it to him (12th imam) or do we give it to the scholars?
Does he (12th imam) pass fatwas, or do the scholars do?

O says:

Each age had hujjahs.

F says:

This raises another question. If every age has a divinely-appointed leader, then why in this verse…
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّبَّانِيُ ّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِن كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ فَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
[Shakir 5:44] Surely We revealed the Taurat in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) judged (matters) for those who were Jews, and the masters of Divine knowledge and the doctors, because they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and do not take a small price for My communications; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.

Why did Allah(swt) entrust the Rabbis and Jewish scholars with the Torah? If the Jews had a divinely appointed leader at the time, surely Allah(swt) would have entrusted the Torah with that divinely-appointed leader, no? Instead He entrusted it to the Jewish Rabbis and scholars.
And this raises other questions of whether or not Imamate being a general theme in the Quran at all or no.

O says:

Come on, you’re acting like a Sunni here. The hadith of the Imam (AJ) w/r to scholars is very clear.

F says:

It’s a legitimate question. Does the Imam guide the scholars?

O says:

You don’t know anything. Please read the history of the time before you speak.

F says:

i have. For example, read the various accounts of people’s supposed messages to the 12 Imam in al-Mufid’s Irshad. Most of it is about money lol.

Then other O says:

And there’s no mention of “after” in the verse 4:165, you are adding words to the translation.
Comment: You can see without any proof, allegations & deviation started!
F says:
Are you serious?
رُّسُلًا مُّبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ لِئَلَّا يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى اللَّـهِ حُجَّةٌ بَعْدَ الرُّسُلِ ۚ وَكَانَ اللَّـهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا
O says:
The Jews did have Imams.
[Shakir 32:24] And We made of them Imams to guide by Our command when they were patient, and they were certain of Our communications.
F says:
The verse you quoted is clear. From the followers of Musa (pbuh), there were righteous people who had patience and persevered and believed in the Signs of God, so God(swt) appointed them as leaders who guide people by His command (ie the Book of God and the Sunnah of Moses), but Allah(swt) doesn’t say that He inspired these people the way He did the Prophets:
وجعلناهم ائمة يهدون بامرنا واوحينا اليهم فعل الخيرات واقام الصلاة وايتاء الزكاة وكانوا لنا عابدين
[Shakir 21:73] And We made them Imams who guided (people) by Our command, and We revealed to them the doing of good and the keeping up of prayer and the giving of the alms, and Us (alone) did they serve

Also, the verse you mentioned doesn’t indicate infallibility, nor is it really evidence for Imamate for the Muslim ummah. It just says that there were leaders to guided people to God’s command. They could have been the ‘uelma of the Jewish nation.

O says:
Here is other verse of imam of previous nation:
[Yusufali 5:12] Allah did aforetime take a covenant from the Children of Israel, and we appointed twelve captains among them. And Allah said: “I am with you: if ye (but) establish regular prayers, practise regular charity, believe in my messengers, honour and assist them, and loan to Allah a beautiful loan, verily I will wipe out from you your evils, and admit you to gardens with rivers flowing beneath; but if any of you, after this, resisteth faith, he hath truly wandered from the path or rectitude.”
F says:
Also akhi, notice how in 5:12, Allah(swt) didn’t tell the Jews to believe in the Imams. He just said to believe in the Messengers. He didn’t say the Messengers and the Imams.

Notice how in the entire Quran, Allah(swt) doesn’t clearly tell us to believe in the Imams. And there’s many evidences that show that the conception of Imamate wasn’t around. For instance, the verse i mentioned earlier says that Allah(swt) entrusted the Torwah with the Rabbis and Jewish scholars.

1. The verse you mentioned tells the Jews to believe in the Messengers.

مَا كَانَ لِبَشَرٍ أَن يُؤْتِيَهُ اللّهُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحُكْمَ وَالنُّبُوَّةَ ثُمَّ يَقُولَ لِلنَّاسِ كُونُواْ عِبَادًا لِّي مِن دُونِ اللّهِ وَلَـكِن كُونُواْ رَبَّانِيِّينَ بِمَا كُنتُمْ تُعَلِّمُونَ الْكِتَابَ وَبِمَا كُنتُمْ تَدْرُسُونَ
Shakir 3:79] It is not meet for a mortal that Allah should give him the Book and the wisdom and prophethood, then he should say to men: Be my servants rather than Allah’s; but rather (he would say): Be worshippers of the Lord because of your teaching the Book and your reading (it yourselves).

Allah(swt) gave people the Books, Wisdom, and Prophethood. Nothing about Imamate. Then the next verse:
وَلَا يَأْمُرَكُمْ أَن تَتَّخِذُوا الْمَلَائِكَةَ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ أَرْبَابًا ۗ أَيَأْمُرُكُم بِالْكُفْرِ بَعْدَ إِذْ أَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ
[Shakir 3:80] And neither would he enjoin you that you should take the angels and the prophets for lords; what! would he enjoin you with unbelief after you are Muslims?

People made shirk with angels and Prophets, but not Imams; again, the conception of Imamate didn’t appear to have existed.

In the Quran, Allah(swt) emphasizes the angels more than the Imams:
مَنْ كَانَ عَدُوًّا لِلَّهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَجِبْرِيلَ وَمِيكَالَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ عَدُوٌّ لِلْكَافِرِينَ
[Shakir 2:98] Whoever is the enemy of Allah and His angels and His messengers and Jibreel and Meekaeel, so surely Allah is the enemy of the unbelievers.

So whoever is an enemy of God and the angels and the Messengers is a kafir. Why didn’t He add “and the Imams” to this list??

…لَيْسَ الْبِرَّ أَنْ تُوَلُّوا وُجُوهَكُمْ قِبَلَ الْمَشْرِقِ وَالْمَغْرِبِ وَلَٰكِنَّ الْبِرَّ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَالْمَلَائِكَة ِ وَالْكِتَابِ وَالنَّبِيِّينَ
[Shakir 2:177] It is not righteousness that you turn your faces towards the East and the West, but righteousness is this that one should believe in Allah and the last day and the angels and the Book and the prophets
(continuing to the end of the verse)

Here, God tells us to believe in Him, the Last Day, the angels, and the Book, and the Prophets. Why does He tell us to believe in the angels (even thought they don’t teach us the religion), yet He doesn’t tell us to believe in the Imams, who are supposed to be the inheritors of the Prophet(pbuh) and are supposed to be key figures in our religion, who are supposed to teach us our deen?

آمَنَ الرَّسُولُ بِمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِ مِن رَّبِّهِ وَالْمُؤْمِنُون َ ۚ كُلٌّ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ ۚ وَقَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۖ غُفْرَانَكَ رَبَّنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ
[Shakir 2:285] The messenger believes in what has been revealed to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers; they all believe in Allah and His angels and His books and His messengers; We make no difference between any of His messengers; and they say: We hear and obey, our Lord! Thy forgiveness (do we crave), and to Thee is the eventual course.

He(swt) says that the true believers believe in God, the angels, His Books, and His Messengers. Why not His Imams?

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُحَادُّونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ أُولَٰئِكَ فِي الْأَذَلِّينَ
[Shakir 58:20] Surely (as for) those who are in opposition to Allah and His Messenger; they shall be among the most abased.

Not the Imams? The next verse:
كَتَبَ اللَّـهُ لَأَغْلِبَنَّ أَنَا وَرُسُلِي ۚ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ قَوِيٌّ عَزِيزٌ
[Shakir 58:21] Allah has written down: I will most certainly prevail, I and My messengers; surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.

God and the Messenger(pbuh) will prevail. Not the Imams?

وَإِذَا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ إِذَا فَرِيقٌ مِنْهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ
[Shakir 24:48] And when they are called to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them, lo! a party of them turn aside

They aren’t called for the Imams to judge between them?

أَفِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ أَمِ ارْتَابُوا أَمْ يَخَافُونَ أَن يَحِيفَ اللَّـهُ عَلَيْهِمْ وَرَسُولُهُ ۚ بَلْ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
[Shakir 24:50] Is there in their hearts a disease, or are they in doubt, or do they fear that Allah and His Messenger will act wrongfully towards them? Nay! they themselves are the unjust.

إِنَّمَا كَانَ قَوْلَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذَا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ أَنْ يَقُولُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ
[Shakir 24:51] The response of the believers, when they are invited to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them, is only to say: We hear and we obey; and these it is that are the successful.

Shouldn’t Allah(swt) invite us to be judge by the Imams as well?

وَمَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَخْشَ اللَّهَ وَيَتَّقْهِ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَائِزُونَ
[Shakir 24:52] And he who obeys Allah and His Messenger, and fears Allah, and is careful of (his duty to) Him, these it is that are the achievers.

You see where i’m going with this. i could quote dozens and dozens of other verses and i don’t find the Shia of conception of Imamate in the Quran, neither in clear verses nor as a general theme.

And no matter how man Sheikhs i ask, i can never get a straight answer. All i get is long philosophical justifications and stringing together unrelated verses through back door tactics to try to prove this doctrine. Nothing clear from Allah(swt). Just like how the Christians do with the trinity.

But the Quran isn’t like this. If it’s important, it should be blatantly clear. Allah(swt) says:
كِتَابٌ فُصِّلَتْ آيَاتُهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ
[Shakir 41:3] A Book of which the verses are made plain, an Arabic Quran for a people who know

2. Yet we cannot get a single verse where Allah(swt) tells us to obey the Imams after the Messenger or where He tells the Prophet(pbuh) to appoint a successor to take over the affair.

This is something i’ve struggled with. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks and God bless

Comment: You can see the verses showed by him really strong enough against imamat of shia faith.
O says:
1. Yes, but there was no Imamate when these verses were revealed. However, as the inheritors of the knowledge of the Prophet (pbuh), the Imams  take his place in our understanding of these verses. The Quran is after all for all time, so these verses must have some relevance after the time of the Prophet (pbuh).
2. I don’t think this was necessary. When the Prophet  announced his prophethood, he was expected to be believed based on his qualities and signs that he brought. It wasn’t as if he pointed to some other book to justify his claim. The same would go for the other Imams . It was obvious that they were the rightful leaders, not just based on their qualities, but the fact that the Prophet explicitly designated Imam Ali  as his successor, and the fact that Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn  would be the leaders of the youth of Paradise. Would it make sense for them to hold that position if they weren’t the best of people on earth? There are many other things as well, but I know you are of course familiar with them, I’m just bringing this up as a reminder.

If such a quality of leadership would continue up to the grandsons of the Prophet, why not afterwards? The hadith on the 12 leaders after the Prophet is mutawatir, and it’s difficult to accept that there could be any drop off in quality after the first 3(or even 1).

As for whether there was this concept of non-Prophet Imams in previous times, I have no idea.

Comment: As usual zero IQ answer.
Other F says:
So when a “wahhaabee/salafee” quotes a Qur’aanic verse, you guys study the context of the verse, and tell him “hey, you are taking it out of context”. But when you guys want to prove your point, you don’t care what the previous verse or the context of the revelation, you’ll just use it to promote your preconceived beliefs and notion. I love the consistency.
O says:
Allah (swt) could have clearly laid out in clearest terms Imamate, but he wrote it in a way in Quran where it’s test of sincerity, and the sincerity is how we take in the Ghadeer declaration.
F says:
Why would He(swt) leave such a vital thing vague and unclear in His Books where He has made so many less important concepts clear to us?
Am i really expected to make something a crucial part of my religion when God Almighty doesn’t make it clear in His Book. The Book where He says He explains everything clearly?
That’s the thing that i have the most difficulty with.
O says:
The verse 5:67 makes it clear that while it’s not blantantly clear in Quran ,the ghadeer declaration was blantantly clear. If people accept the clear message of Ghadeer, then they will find the topic of Ghadeer declaration in Quran, where it’s explained in detail, but in less clear ways.
F says:
Alas our view of Ghadeer strikes me as odd as well. How is it that 10’s of thousands of Muslims who fought alongside the Prophet  in the way of Allah(swt) with their lives, their wealth, and their property suddenly reject the Prophet’s(pbuh) final message?
Some of these Companions used to jostle with one another to drink the wudhu of the Prophet  or to have piece of his blessed hair because they loved him so such.

Look how ALI HIMSELF describes some of the Companions:

I have seen the companions of the Prophet but I do not find anyone resembling them. They began the day with dust on the hair and face (in hardship of life) and passed the night in prostration and standing in prayers. Sometimes they put down their foreheads and sometimes their cheeks. With the recollection of their resurrection it seemed as though they stood on live coal. It seemed that in between their eyes there were signs like knees of goats, resulting from long prostrations. When Allah was mentioned their eyes flowed freely till their shirt collars were drenched. They trembled for fear of punishment and hope of reward as the tree trembles on the day of stormy wind.

Would Imam Ali eulogize a group of people who supposed apostates after the Prophet(pbuh) in such a beautiful manner? Would people like this really abandon the Prophet’s(pbuh) words?

Or look how Allah(swt) describes the Muhajirs:
الَّذِينَ إِنْ مَكَّنَّاهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ أَقَامُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَوُا الزَّكَاةَ وَأَمَرُوا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَنَهَوْا عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ ۗ وَلِلَّهِ عَاقِبَةُ الْأُمُورِ
Those who, should We establish them in the land, will keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and enjoin good and forbid evil; and Allah’s is the end of affairs. (22:41)

And you know how Allah(swt) glorifies the Muhajireen and Ansar (the former especially) time and again in the Quran. Or look what Allah(swt) says about the Ummah of Muhammad  as a whole:
كُنتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّـهِ
[Shakir (a part of) 3:110] You are the best of the nations raised up for (the benefit of) men; you enjoin what is right and forbid the wrong and believe in Allah

Allah(swt) tells us those people (sahaba’s) were the BEST nation from mankind, yet the Shia try to portray them as borderline munafiqs.
This beautiful verse tells us they were the BEST of nations and they encourage the good and forbid the evil and that they believe in God.

Would a group of people whom Allah(swt) describes as the best of people, whom Ali himself eulogizes, whom Allah(swt) says encourages the good and forbid the evil… would a group of people like this stab the Prophet  in the back like that? Very strange.

i’m not going to say that a Companion is every Muslim who saw the Prophet , nor am i going to say the all of the Companions were perfect ma’sum people. But the Ummah as a whole was a good Ummah.

So i find our view of Ghadeer to be strange as well.

O says:
I have a question for you, is the concept of a mystic exalted high families type meaning as we understand it, do you find this at least in the Quran? Let’s start with this , and inshallah, we will see if it’s in Quran or not.
F says:
i don’t understand what this means
Do you mean like certain families that have been favored/raised above all others? If so, then of course:
إِنَّ اللَّـهَ اصْطَفَىٰ آدَمَ وَنُوحًا وَآلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَآلَ عِمْرَانَ عَلَى الْعَالَمِينَ
Surely God has chosen Adam and Noah and Aal Ibrahim and Aal ‘Imran over the words(3:33)

However, you should also be aware of the fact that there were many other pious and knowledgeable scholars from the progeny of Hasan and Husayn other than the 9 that the Ithna ‘Ashari emphasize. There was a reason why so many Shia believed in the Imamate of Zayd (ra) and the others.



Filed under Question bank for shiite's, Rebuttals

12 responses to “Missing concept Of IMAMAT in Quran

  1. Researcher

    Where is part two brother?

    Really interesting discussion.

  2. وَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ أَئِمَّةً يَدْعُونَ إِلَى النَّارِ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ لَا يُنصَرُونَ

    “And We made them leaders(Imams) inviting to the Fire, and on the Day of Resurrection they will not be helped.”
    Al-Qasas Verse:41

    What do you think about his verse?

  3. Walaikum Salam,

    I said what is your understanding of the verse that I quoted?

  4. Taj Wasif

    The Institution of Imamat: My Dilemma & My Plea.

    Imamat … Appostolic Succession

    I came across an article titled ‘Imamate’. I really admired the tone, gentility and polite manner in which it was presented. I wish I could reproduce it as the style must be held up as an example to all of us who wish to argue their case in Islam.

    Thus in keeping with the diction, I will also refrain from overloading the readers with too much ‘Theology’ and quotations, but endeavour to adopt a ‘common sense’ approach in argument.

    WHAT IS BELIEF (EIMAAN): By ‘belief’ I mean an essential act of faith related to an article of ‘Deen’, which requires a formal ‘profession of belief’, uttering specific words, and which affects a person’s status as a ‘Muslim’. e.g., a declaration of ‘belief’ in Allah, and the Prophethood of Muhammad (saw). On the other hand, a person may ‘believe’ that the earth is flat … but this ‘belief’ is not related to ‘Eimaan’. We are not discussing this kind of ‘belief’.

    ‘Belief’, defined above, excludes ‘opinion’ or conjecture and admits only inflexible certitude, even though a person may not have any direct knowledge (by deploying five senses) of the object of ‘belief’. Whereas, there can be no difference of view regarding an item of ‘belief’… but interpretations can differ regarding matters of ‘detail’ .i.e., it is essential to ‘believe’ in Angels, but people differ regarding, say, their numbers or nature. Again, it is essential to ‘believe’ that Qur’an is the revealed word of Allah, but people can differ in their estimation of the manner in which revelation occurred.

    Because eternal salvation depends on ‘Eimaan’, and without the profession of formal ‘belief’ actions are void, it will be seen that Allah Ta’ala, by His infinite mercy has kept matters of ‘belief’ to an absolute minimum. It is significant that the formula of faith requires ‘belief’ only in Allah, Angels, Revelation, all the Prophets, and the fact that every individual will be held responsible for their actions on the Day of Judgement. These are the five fundamental articles of ‘belief’ in Islam (Q. II:285). In this respect the addition of , ‘Ali’yun Wali’ullah’, is clearly and manifestly an innovation being supra-numeric to Qur’an and the Tradition.

    NEED FOR ‘BELIEF’ IN THE DIETY: It will constitute an insult to the intelligence of the readers if I were to dwell at length in order to justify the importance and the need to express ‘belief’ in Allah with all His attributes. The rationale is as simple as it is obvious.

    NEED FOR ‘BELIEF’ IN THE PROPHETS: The relevance of inviting ‘belief’ in the person of a prophet is also manifestly clear. He is the vehicle of revelation, and as such, ‘belief’ in, the prophet’s claim of appointment by Divine intervention, his infallibility, his freedom from sin (cf. Bible), total submission to his message as the Will of God (without any dispute or reservation), are of paramount importance and complementary to other articles of faith.

    Denial of a prophet automatically puts a person beyond the pale of faith, and rejection of a messenger, therefore, is denial of God. Hence, it is (as it ought to be) a matter of untold relief, that Muhammad (saw) was the LAST ‘Haadee’, and this, mercifully, means that the Muslim Ummah is absolved from the ‘burden’ of ‘rejection’, and so forever protected from denying God. A natural corollary is that Qur’an will remain uncorrupted (unlike other scriptures), as Allah has guaranteed its pristine purity … till the end of time. This represents a supreme favour from Allah and another aspect of Muhammad (saw)being referred to as a ‘mercy to the world’. In pursuance of this fine point, I will make reference to the concluding two verses of surat Al’Baqarah and ask the reader to dwell a moment on the deeper meaning of ‘…Our Lord! Lay not on us such a burden as Thou didst lay on those before us! Our Lord do not impose upon us that which we have not the strength to bear’. This, in my humble opinion, is a veiled reference to the completion of Allah’s favour to mankind mentioned elsewhere (Q. V: 3). Allah has made Muhammad (saw)the last human in whom one has to express formal ‘belief’ in order to attain salvation. By this merciful act, Allah has released us from the ‘burden’ of continually agitating and looking over our shoulder in expectation of another prophet, a phenomenon that was an onerous ‘burden’ in past ages. Released from this ‘burden’, and coupled with the assurance of the preservation of Qur’an, the Ummah can now, thankfully, divert all its energies in realising the ‘Kingdom of God’ and in … ‘… doing the Will of God on Earth’ for ever more. Muslims are now in a very favoured and elevated position, compared with past nations. The whole Ummah, subsequent to the advent of Prophet Muhammad (saw) and by the ‘completion’ of revelation and preservation of the Qur’an, has now been installed as the ‘Vicegerent of Allah’. For, ‘His Kingdom’ has now arrived, and ‘His Will is now done on Earth as it was being done in Heaven’, prior to the completion of religion.

    NEED FOR ‘BELIEF’ IN THE REVEALED SCRIPTURE: Revealed word of God is the only record which survives the person of the prophet and after his demise, the only testimony of Allah’s Will (if preserved). Expression of ‘belief’ in the revealed scripture is a natural progression of ‘Eimaan’ (belief) in the Deity and the prophets. This is a general proposition, but Qur’an is unique in that, as stated above, Allah has mercifully guaranteed its preservation. This was a logical consequence of the end of the cycle of al’Anbiya (the prophets). Therefore, with the advent of the last Messenger (A), preservation of Qur’an, and establishment of a unified Quibla, as a permanent ‘Guiding Light’, the function of the prophets has now devolved upon the shoulders of this Ummah (the middle nation) in the form of Dawah (propagation), Ijtihad (innovative adaptation), Qiyas (deduction) & Ijma (Consensus). (Q. II:143)

    A REVOLUTIONARY MESSAGE DELIVERED 15 CENTURIES AGO: ‘Lo! The noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct’ (Q. XLIX:13).

    In pre-Islamic age, during days of Jahili’yeh, the twin institutions of Divine Right of the Monarch (determined by lineage) and the Office of the Priest (determined by caste) were the twin most pernicious means of ‘Social Control’ and exploitation. Islam unmasked the corruption and iniquity of these institutions, demolished them at a stroke … and raised the standard of a fraternal and a just social order based upon the supremacy of law and dignity of all humans. From hence on, the status of a person was determined neither by ostensible wealth, nor by rank of birth or class, rather by the quality of one’s actions and deeds in real life. Most important dynamic being the concept of accountability of each individual for their actions, on the Day of Judgement without any possibility of ‘ransom’ or ‘intercession’. It was stated clearly and unequivocally that all human beings have equal status, by virtue of being the children of Adam (A), and in order to lay humble any feeling of arrogance, it is clearly stated that Adam was created from dust. With the demolition of ‘Priesthood’, all barriers between the Creator and His creation are thus removed.

    I will conclude this section by underscoring the point that area of ‘belief’, mercifully, has been restricted to a bare minimum, and both, the relevance and the importance of ‘good deeds’ has been duly emphasised. It is made abundantly clear, that in contrast with many other religions, Islam is a very simple and a very practical religion … and because deeds speak louder than words, Islam has always highlighted the need to ‘perform’ rather than merely ‘profess’. To me it seems self evident that more we expand the area of ‘belief’, greater will be the scope for fracturing the unity of the Ummah, dividing loyalties, thereby increasing the prospect of falling from grace. After Muhammad (saw), we are not required to formally express our ‘belief’ in any other person. This, in actual fact, depicts Allah’s great wisdom and infinite mercy upon this Ummah.

    This concludes my primary submission. Hereafter, in the light of what has been submitted, I will raise a few dilemmas regarding Imamat as an institution, which Brother Tejani has mentioned.

    My first dilemma.

    What are the characteristics of a Nabi? A Nabi is appointed by Allah. A Nabi makes a declaration of his mission. It is essential to express verbal ‘belief’ in his office. A Nabi receives Divine revelation. By virtue of his mission, a prophet is infallible (ma’soom). Because he is considered infallible, his word is final and cannot be disputed. Muhammad (saw), in addition, had the unique status of being the last messenger, the Seal of the prophets, Khatam al’Nabi’yeen.

    There have been many attempts by impostors, claiming to be prophets. They all claimed to be Divinely appointed, recipients of revelation, claimed infallibility, and invited ‘belief’. Down the centuries, Muslims of all Schools of Thought, including the Shias, collectively rejected each and every claimant without any hesitation. And, Muslims are manifestly justified in doing so.

    If there is consensus regarding this fact, then to claim Imamat as a continuing phenomenon represents a contradiction which I personally find difficult to reconcile from purely a common sense perspective. Substituting another term like ‘Mujaddid’, ‘Zillee Nabi’, ‘Buroozi Rasool’, ‘Mazhar-e-Elahi’ or ‘Imam’ (as in Shia theology), these terms are a merely a matter of semantics and a play on words. If a person claims to possess the attributes of a ‘Rasool’ or a ‘Nabi’ (as used in the Qur’an), then no matter what term is used, it represents an attempt to circumvent the finality of Muhammad’s (saw) prophethood. Herein lies my first dilemma.

    My second dilemma.

    Br. Tejani points out the original deviation at the demise of the Messenger of Allah in not accepting the ‘Imamat’ of seyyedina Ali. He may well be correct. But seyyedina Ali is no longer present in person (neither are any of the Imams). In practical terms, how will it help me if I were to acknowledge their Imamat, and what practical difference will this retrospective change of ‘belief’ on my part make in me? How will this mere declaration enhance the quality of my Islam?

    I am absolutely convinced that seyyedina Ali, without exception, reinforced the message which Muhammad (saw) brought, and followed his example faithfully. If that is the case, then what is the logic of expressing a formal allegiance to Ali, at this distant moment in time, why not simply follow the message of Muhammad (saw) and emulate his pious and illustrious example?

    I can see some relevance of making a formal allegiance if a person was living in the time of seyyedina Ali, or if one was contemporary with his successors, to pledge allegiance to them in person in order to be guided in faith and practice. But to make a verbal declaration of ‘belief’, centuries retrospectively, in order, essentially, to comply with the teachings of the Prophet (A), seems somewhat superfluous and puzzling. It merely adds a ‘tier’ or a level of ‘belief’ without serving any practical purpose. Love and respect for ‘Ahl-e-bait’ is a separate issue altogether. Herein lies my second dilemma.

    My third dilemma.

    Qur’an clearly states that if there is any divergence or conflict of views leading to a dispute with ‘Ulil Amr’ (those in Authority) whether in the affairs of the Ummah, or in deciding a legal point, or in adopting a course of action, then the (without exception) the matter in dispute, should be referred to Allah (Qur’anic text) and the Prophet (Oral Tradition). From what has been stated above, there is no room for ‘dispute’ with the revealed authority (Allah & the Prophet). Hence, the very fact that there can be a dispute with contemporary, authority amplifies the point that no person, subsequent to the Prophet (A) can claim infallibility. Therefore, the Imam cannot be considered infallible because his interpretation or judgement is open to challenge. And, if the authority of the Imam is not ‘infallible’, the relevance of his office is in doubt, to say the least. It may be relevant to note that the status of an Imam, in Shia theology, is analogous to the Pope (when he speaks ex-cathedra) or a Priest (in other religions). But, by general consensus, there is no Papacy or priesthood in Islam. Herein lies my third dilemma.

    My fourth dilemma.

    That prophethood has come to an end is an undisputed ‘belief’ in Islam. If there was a need to continue guidance of the Ummah by the medium of continuing revelation (an undisputed authority), why did Allah bring the age of prophesy to an end in the first instance? The history of Bani Isra’eel (Children of Israel) is replete with the appearance of ‘minor’ prophets (prophets nevertheless) in the wake of Moses (A), the Lawgiver. In Islam, Jesus (A) is regarded as a Nabi (a prophet who does not bring a new dispensation), because he followed the Torah.

    There is a well-known Tradition, which relates that the Messenger of Allah (A) observed that … ‘…The Ulema (scholars – in plural) of my Ummah will be like the (minor) prophets of Bani Isra’eel’. He is not reported to have used the word Imam or even Ahl al’Bait (household of the Prophet). Herein lies my fourth dilemma.

    My fifth dilemma.

    If the institution of Imamat, as understood in Shia theology, was to continue, then why did the last Imam go into ‘Ghaibat’ (Occultation). Who has been guiding the Ummah for the last millennium in his absence? The doctrine of Wilayat-e-Imam (representative of the Imam in absentia) is not a valid answer.

    Even among the Shia Schools of Thought, there is no unanimity as to the identity of the Imams. Some sects believe in one set of Imams and some in another set. These schools do not even agree upon the number of Imams. Imamat does not seem to have solved the problem of guidance of the Ummah through the leadership of infallible Imams. Herein lies my fifth dilemma.

    My final dilemma.

    Far fetched ‘Esoteric’, torturous and exotic explanations from the Qu’an aside, the innovative belief in ‘Imamat’ seems to have solved no real purpose in preventing, repeated and extensive, ‘Schism’. It is a depressing fact that doctrinal rift between various Shia religions [mazahib] is greater and more fundamental than the non-Shia. In ‘Shiism’ there are as many [perhaps more] ‘sects’ than the Sunnis … Ithna Asharis … being only just one of these !! There even exists difference in the status and succession of ‘Imamat’. Many Shia doctrines consider Qur’an redundant in the presence of an Imam and ‘Imamat’ to be superior to ‘Risalat’ [even incarnation of Allah in person] … and a continuing phenomenon. If Imamat was meant to ensure preservation, pristine purity and unity of belief … it seems to have failed spectacularly? As for Shia ‘Fiqh’, even among the Ithna Ashari Ayatollahs, the divergence of opinion even in mundane matters is just as mind blowing.

    How can one claim unity when there is such diversity? Truth is that once we peel off the ‘Sophisticated’ [from Sufism] conjectures and speculative interpretations of the Qur’an, very little remains that underpins the doctrine of Imamat, except what is commonly understood in the lexicology of Qur’an and plain Arabic.

    I must reiterate that these are my personal views, observed entirely from my angle of vision, from the perspective of common sense. All I have endeavoured to achieve is to take a panoramic vista of the teachings and the spirit of Islam, and try to remain objective (in so far as possible) and consistent in forming an opinion. Since there is no compulsion in religion in Islam (Q. II: 256), rather full scope for freedom of conscience, I fully accord the right of adhering to one’s ‘belief’. In this regard I sincerely respect brother Tejani’s views and applaud his generously polite and judicious manner of diction in arguing his case.

    Let me conclude by stating that, subsequent to the person of the Prophet (saw), I have special love and regard for seyyedina Ali. Had I been alive during the first decade after the Prophet’s demise, perhaps I may well have voted for seyyedina Ali [ra] as the ‘Fist among the Equals’. But that is neither here nor there. What followed is now history. Anyhow, I regard Caliphate as reflecting ‘collective’ leadership, as ordained in the chapter called ‘Consultation’… “And their affairs are conducted through consultation among themselves” (Q. XLII: 38). Thus, Qur’an does not employ the term ‘Imamat’ but ‘Shura’ i.e. consultation. Herein lies my final dilemma.


    It is my submission that irrespective of whoever was the ‘Khaleefa’, he did not impose a one-man rule. Seyyedina Ali was a prominent member of the ‘Shura’ (The Consultative Council) and remained involved in governance, at the highest level, for three decades. The Caliph was only the symbolic head of state. All the companions were very capable people and there was little to choose between them. No doubt each person was an expert in one field of endeavour or the other, and their combination represented a collective leadership of awesome ability and unmitigated integrity.

    The recommendation of governance by ‘Shura’, having recourse to Ijtihad, Qiyas and Ijma, dispels all my doubts and confirms the superfluity of the institution of ‘Imamat’. These facts reinforce the view that with the advent of the last Messenger of Allah (A), humanity had received its final guidance and Allah had completed His favour by perfecting the ‘Deen’ and indicated, in no uncertain terms, Islam as the chosen path. The age of ‘miracles’ and spoon-feeding had come to a close, and truth had been differentiated from falsehood. By the revelation of Al Furquaan (i.e. the Qur’an) humanity had been transported from darkness into light. The whole human race had come of age. It now had to stand upon its own two feet and exercise the devolved right of ‘Freedom of Choice’ with virtual independence, together with all the rewards and consequences that flow from it. Each member of the race individually, and all human beings collectively (led by the Ummah) were to be held accountable for their deeds and actions on the ‘Day of Final Reckoning’, when we shall all be assembled before your God and mine.

    This view, of the collective (rather than of one Imam) responsibility of the Ummah, is further strengthened by the verse, ‘Wali takun minkum ummatun yad’oona ilal khaiyr …’ (Q. III: 104).

    In my view, the question of love, respect and consideration for the household of the Prophet, is a separate issue altogether. Those, whoever they may be, who violated their rights will be held answerable in the sight of Allah. We should leave this matter to His judgement. This is an equitable attitude. As for the virtuous station of seyyedina Ali, there can be no doubt that he was the ‘Gateway of Knowledge’ and, spiritually speaking, the most accomplished and towering personality of his time. But, this does not mean that he was the only person capable of leading the Ummah as the administrative (secular) head too. Spiritual leadership need not be synonymous, or coincidental, with temporal leadership. And, seyyedina Ali, as the most revered member of the inner cabinet and Consultative Council (al’Shura), was a leading light and part of the decision making mechanism at every step of the way. Seyyedina Omar rightly exclaimed, ‘We would have perished, had it not been for Ali’. Hence it is wrong to say that Ali had been marginalized in any way in shaping the affairs of the Ummah. That, he was not installed nominally as the Executive Head, is totally irrelevant. At the critical juncture of the demise of the Prophet (A), the Ummah went through a process of selection (or election), and the choice settled upon seyyedina Abu Bakr, by consensus (endorsed by seyyedina Ali himself), means that the matter of choice was satisfactorily resolved.

    Another aspect of apostolic succession (although we are not discussing succession in this article, rather the institution of ‘Imamat’) is that if Ali were to be appointed as the succeeding first Khaleefa, the world would find it very easy, although quite unjustifiably, to accuse the Messenger of Allah (saw) of establishing dynastic rule and the democratic and egalitarian message of Islam would have been swamped by malicious propaganda. Hence the Prophet (saw), despite his preferences, if any (and we shall never know), rightly and sagaciously, left the choice open to the Ummah at large. The only mention of preference that the Prophet (A)is reported to have indicated was, ‘Al A’immatu min al’Koreish’ (The leaders shall be from amongst the tribe of Koreish’). This reinforces my view that after emphasising ‘conduct of affairs by consultation’, the Prophet (saw) did not intervene any further and the door was left wide open for the Ummah to exercise its prerogative of choosing the leader by suffrage.

    In any event, majority view is that, the office of the Khaleefa (Caliph) is a political and not a religious issue and one, which is not tied up with ‘belief’ or Eimaan. Hence if a person were to denounce any of the ‘Khulafa-e-Rashidoon’ (merely a reverential term), they would not forfeit ‘belief’, deviant as this course of action may be. It merely represents a difference of opinion in the interpretation of history … not religion.

    Hence, if we regard Imamat, as denoting collective spiritual leadership as separate from temporal office, there is no divergence between the Shia and the Sunni schools of thought. All the, so called, Shia Imams are also Sunni Imams. Without exception, all of them were revered beacons of integrity, spirituality and scholarship of their respective era. But, however exceptional in knowledge and pious in character, in Sunni view, they were, nevertheless, mortal beings.

    My concluding plea.

    After having made my views known (not as the last word), I implore all my Shia and Sunni brethren to respect each other’s point of view and cooperate against the common enemy. It is desirable, and indeed feasible for both, to achieve this unity in practice without ‘compromising’ the essence of their ‘belief’ system. We can sort out mutual differences when we can afford the luxury. At the moment we must stop the civil war and bury the hatchet in order to provide a united front against the ‘Yezeedi forces’. Seyyedina Ali [ra] and Seyyedina Hasan & Husain’s [ra] bright example is beckoning us to follow their lead, let us cry ‘Lab’baiyka La Shareeka Lak’a’ and make the leap.

    With a slight amendment to the much quoted verse of a renowned medieval saint and scholar, I too subscribe to:-

    ‘Haqqa! Keh baqaa’ye La’ilaaha hast Husaiyn’ [Verily! Husain [ibn’Ali] immortalised the tradition of Islam]

    …. Why? Because as another poet observed > ‘Qatl-e-Husaiyn asl meiyn marg-e-Yazid hai Islam zindah hota haeiy her Karbala key ba’ad’
    [Martydom of Husain is infact the death of Yazid] [Islam is resurrected in the aftermath of each Karbala]

    I will conclude by reciting a cherished supplication, please feel free to join me.

    “O God! Forgive me my delinquency, mine ignorance, and my immoderation in my endeavours. O God! Forgive me for what I hasten and what I defer, for what I reveal and what I conceal, for my manifest error and my hidden design. O God! Set aright my faith, which is the safeguard of my Hereafter. Set aright my world wherein is my living. O God! In thy care I commend my soul, make me penitent and set aright my orientation, for unto Thee shall be my return. (Ameen)”.

    Momtaaz Jung
    Email: mk62rb@hotmail.co.uk

  5. Khalid Mahmood

    I find the arguments from Momtaaz Jung very valid. I have been researching this question of Immamat myself and can comfortably say that the way Momtaaz has summed it up it is brilliant as well as unbiased. I also agree that the events as those unfolded after Rasool Allah are now part of history and any contention against any individual cannot be corrected or defended after 1400 years. Even if someone believes that Syeddana Ali should have been a leader that is OK to believe as long as it does not encourage anyone to curse the others before him. Let the matter of others that are there in history contrary to our wishes of today be decided by Allah the Almighty as only He has that right. Lets get together on the items of belief that are common to all muslims and lets not spend our efforts in quarreling over matters that cannot change my present and my future and consequently of no help to shape the future of the ummah. Aik houn muslim haram kee paasbani kay leeyay.

  6. David Kuperman

    Ref for Imamat

    Quran:2:124] And remember that Abraham was tried by his Lord with certain commands, which he fulfilled: He said: “I will make thee an Imam to the Nations.” He pleaded: “And also (Imams) from my offspring!” He answered: “But My Promise is not within the reach of evil-doers.”

    This above is clear that Imam is infallible. Abraham (as) was last test was at age 95. Was he prophet then? If he was prophet then he was made Imam after prophethood.

    Now here are the verses from Quran about necessity of Imamat

    Quran 32:24] And We appointed, from among them, IMAMS, giving guidance under Our command, so long as they persevered with patience and continued to have faith in Our Signs.

    Quran 28:5] And We wished to be Gracious to those who were being depressed in the land, to make them IMAMS and make them heirs,

    The above verse is clear that Imams are heirs of ISLAM.

    Quran 17:71] One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams: those who are given their record in their right hand will read it (with pleasure), and they will not be dealt with unjustly in the least.

    The following verse is clear that IMAMS are made by Allah and they get command from Allah.

    Quran 21:73] And We made them IMAMS , guiding (men) by Our Command, and We sent them inspiration to do good deeds, to establish regular prayers, and to practice regular charity; and they constantly served Us (and Us only).

    The following Hadiths in Sunnis books about IMAMS but they changed the word from IMAMS to KHALIFAS. But All Muslims (SHIA AND SUNNIS) are waiting for IMAM MEHDI (AS) NOT KHALIFA MEHDI while Sunni Hadiths say Khalifa but NO BODY IS WAITING FOR LAST KHALIFA. IT MEANS THE WORD IMAMS IS REPLACED BY KHALIFA

    Here are the references of 12 Imams from different books including SUNNI books. Sunni corupted many hadeeths to cover their beloved KHALIFAHS so they changed the word IMAM in those HADEETHS to KHALIFAHS because they can snatched the power but could not become IMAM. Here are those hadeeths including VERSE from TORAH about 12 PRINCES but TORAH is translated. ALLAH’s prince does not mean wordly prince. This means princes of ALLAH. Another point is that majority of SUNNI believe in 12 IMAMS and they acknowledge first 6 and then they are waiting for the last one. Every SUNNI is waiting for the last IMAM and also believe in IMAM ALI (AS), IMAM HASSAN (AS), IMAM HUSSAIN (AS), IMAM ZAINAL ABIDIN (AS), IMAM BAQAR (AS) and IMAM JAFFAR SADIQ (AS) then they do not recognize next 5 IMAMS but waiting for the 12th. Very odd? Another thing– Sunni rulers changed and made so many hadeeths to raise the rank of ABU BAKER and OMER, now I am very suspecious about ABU BAKER and OMER whether they were QURAISH or not. In SUNNI history books OMER is know as BOUDVIAN and his grandmother married her own son after the death of her husband. This thing can never happen in QURAISH family.
    TURAAT (TORAH) reference is as follow:
    Sarah, thy wife, shall bear thee a son and thou shall call him Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for everlasting covenant for his seed after him. And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: behold, I have blessed him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him exceedingly, twelve princes shall be beget, and I will make him a great nation.” (Genesis 17: 19-20)
    The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.s.) informed that the number of Imams after him are twelve, as the compilers of Sihah and Masanid have narrated it.
    In Sahih of Muslim:
    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “The [Islamic] religion will continue until the Hour (day of resurrection), having twelve Caliphs for you, all of them will be from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1453, Tradition #10
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1010, Tradition #4483
    Hadith #3398 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “The affairs of people will continue to be conducted (well) as long as they are governed by the twelve men, all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1453, Tradition #6
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1010, Tradition #4478
    Hadith #3394 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    Narrated Jabir ibn Samura: The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “This matter (life) will not end, until it is passed by twelve Caliphs.” He then whispered a sentence. I asked my father what the Prophet said. He said, the Prophet added: “All of them will be from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1452, Tradition #5
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1009, Tradition #4477
    Hadith #3393 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs, all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1453, Tradition #7
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1010, Tradition #4479
    Hadith #3395 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs, all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1453, Tradition #8
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1010, Tradition #4480
    Hadith #3396 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “Islam will continue to be triumphant and protected until there have been twelve Caliphs, all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sahih Muslim (Arabic version)
    Kitab al-Imaara,
    1980 Edition Pub. in Saudi Arabia,
    v3, p1453, Tradition #9
    Sahih Muslim, (English version)
    Chapter DCCLIV (titled: The People are subservient to the Quraysh and the Caliphate is the Right of the Quraysh),
    v3, p1010, Tradition #4481
    Hadith #3397 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)
    In Sunan of al-Tirmidhi:
    The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “There will be after me twelve Amir (Prince/Ruler), all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sunan al-Tirmidhi (Arabic)
    Chapter of Fitan,
    2:45 (India) and 4:501 Tradition # 2225 (Egypt)
    Hadith #2149 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)
    In Sunan of Abu Dawud:

    “This religion remains standing until there are twelve vicegerents over you, all of them agreeable to the nation, all of them from Quraysh.”
    Sunan Abu Dawud (Arabic)
    2:421, Kitab al-Mahdi.

    Sunan Abu Dawud (Arabic)
    3:106, Kitab al-Mahdi.
    Hadith #3731 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

    “The Prophet (PBUH&HF) said: “Islam will continue to be triumphant until there have been twelve Caliphs,” So people said Takbir and made noise, then he said a light word I didn’t hear. I [Jabir bin Samura] said to my father: What did he say? He said “All of them are from Quraysh.”
    Sunan Abu Dawud (Arabic)
    2:421, Kitab al-Mahdi.

    Sunan Abu Dawud (Arabic)
    3:106, Kitab al-Mahdi.
    Hadith #3732 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)
    In Sahih of al-Bukhari:
    Narrated Jabir ibn Samura: I heard the Prophet saying, “There will be twelve commanders (Amir).” He then said a sentence which I did not hear. My father said, the Prophet added, “All of them will be from Quraysh
    Sahih al-Bukhari (English)
    Hadith: 9.329, Kitabul Ahkam.

    Sahih al-Bukhari (Arabic)
    4:165, Kitabul Ahkam.
    Hadith #6682 (numbering of al-‘Alamiyyah)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s