For those of you that don’t know, Sulaiman bin Jareer is the leader of the Sulaimaniya/Jareeriya Zaidi sect. He lived during the times of Abu Ja’afar Al-Mansour, which means that he was a contemporary of Ja’afar Al-Sadiq.
Al-Nawbakhti, the Shia historian relates his story and his arguments against the Imamis:
When Ja’afar bin Mohammad pointed towards the Imamate of his son Isma’eel, he (Isma’eel) died during the life of his father, and they (the Imamis) turned away from the Imamate of Ja’afar. They said, “We were lied upon, and the Imam does not lie, nor does he say what doesn’t happen.” They narrated from Ja’afar that he said that bada’a (what was hidden has become apparent) occured to Allah as to what would happen to the Imamate of Isma’eel. They turned away from bada’a and the will of Allah and said that this is false and not permissible. They shifted to the view of the Batriyyah.
As for the statement of Sulaiman bin Jareer, who said to his companions that the Imams of the Rafidha created two ideological view, which prevents them from ever finding an apparent lie from the Imams, which are bada’a and taqiyyah.
(Sulaiman bin Jareer said:) As for bada’a, when the Imams have taken the station of prophets amongst their people, in the knowledge of past and future, they told their Shias, “Tomorrow, such and such will happen.” If that matter occurred, they said, “Didn’t we tell you that this would happen?! We knew this from Allah what the prophets knew from Him, and between us and Allah are the causes of which how the prophets knew from Allah what they knew.” However, if that matter that they said would happen didn’t occur, they would said, “Bada’a has occurred to Allah, so it didn’t happen.”
As for taqiyyah, for when there were so many questions regarding the halal and haram and other matters that they responded to, and these answers were memorized, written, and documented, by their Shias, and the Imams themselves didn’t memorize their answers due to the passage of time, for their questions didn’t occur in one day, nor one month, but were years and months apart, and different times, they answered a question with many contradicting answers, and contradicting answers with a similar answer. So, when they were encountered due to these contradictions in their answers, were condemned, and they were asked, “Where did these contradictions come from, and how is this possible?” The Imams responded, “Our responses were taqiyyah, and we can answer in whichever way we want, for that is to us, and we know what is best for you, and what will cause us both to last, and what prevents our enemies from us.”
So, how is it possible for their lies to be apparent and how is it possible to know their truth from their falsehood?!
Al-Nawbakhti comments: And so, a group of the companions of Abi Ja’afar joined Sulaiman bin Jareer and left the opinion that Ja’afar (as) is the Imam.
I (Farid) say: The argumentation of Sulaiman bin Jareer is flawless. It is no wonder that Imamis joined him after formulating these arguments. However, as a Sunni, I am obligated to believe that it was not the Twelver Imams that created these concepts, but rather, the liars amongst their students. For we do not find cases in which the bada’a card needs to be played in the narrations attributed to the Al-Baqir and Al-Sadiq in the Sunni hadith library, nor do we find the insane amount of contradictions that we find in the Shia hadith library within our system.Written by Farid Original article link Posted here by 13S2010