Ask A Question About Islam And Muslims

9 Questions


Thank you for your question. Naming children according to sectarian lines was not a factor in the early ages of Islam and therefore, it is not an indication of holding a certain person with the same name in high esteem. For example, certain companions of the Imams (as) were named Yazid and Mu'awiya, but this in no way indicated that they condoned the actions of the Caliphs with the same names, or held them in high esteem.

May you always be successful. 

Taqiyyah has conditions and it aims to save the believers, but when mam Husain (AS) faced a complete different situation when the whole religion was in danger and here was no way at all to save Islam but to give his life to save Islam. There was no question of Taqiyyah in such dangerous situation. Neither Imam Ali (AS) nor any other Imam faced such situation, and if any Infallible faces such situation, they will definitely do exactly what Imam Husain (AS) did in sacrificing their lives to save Islam.


Imam Ali (AS) is the Imam of all Muslims by order of Allah (SWT) declared by the Prophet Muhammad (SAWA) in hundreds of occasions including Ghadeer Khum in which the Proohet ordered all Muslims who were present to give allegiance to Ali (AS) as the leader of all who believed in the Prophet ( SAWA). The political plot of Saqeefa did deprive Imam Ali (AS) from his right in the government, but did not change the fact the he is the real Imam of Muslims. Being the real Imam, Imam Ali (AS) never dealt with the three Khalifs as real successors of the Prophet (SAWA) but just worldly rulers. He never gave them his Zakat nor prayed behind any of them. ( Al-Thahabi; Seyar A'lam Al-Nubalaa' , Vol 9, Page 284) stated: Ali did not attend with the three Khalifs any Jum'ah Prayer nor Jama'ah prayers.


There does not appear to be much in-depth history on the circumstances of these narrations and who transmitted them. By the time that they were narrated in Bukhari and Muslim the concept of 'Imam' did exist explicitly and was known in wider circles. It certainly would not have been in the interests of Bukhari to cite a narration that mentioned the word 'Imam' and 'Bani Hashim', since that would have clearly overturned the forced legitimacy of Abu Bakr and 'Umar's caliphates. In particular 'Umar held that that the successorship belonged to 'the people' (meaning Quraysh). The Uthmaniyya, being of Quraysh, therefore held that the caliphate belonged to them. One can surmise that perhaps there may have been narrations in circulation predicting twelve Imams, but that the wording had been 'adjusted' to mask the true implication, if not to 'redirect' the meaning of the narration to suit political purposes. It really needs an expert like Suleiman Ali Mourad (who has analysed the 'transferral of authorship' between the Ahl al-Bayt (as) and various figures in the Sufi tradition, i.e. the attribution to Sufi figures of sayings of the Ahl al-Bayt) to do a proper textual, historical analysis of these narrations.