hmm....doctors eat healthier and and exercise more..... not necessarily true. I know enough doctors who smoke and are out of shape...despite the fact that they (should) know better. And hey...they have their MDs and much more in some instances.

to bold font, click on the Question mark at the bottom right hand corner of the comment box... it tells you how to bold, italicize, and increase size...

The knowledge of the true consequences of sin WILL BE KNOWN ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT. Whatever the Prophet (S) has told us has been THROUGH REVELATION.

Thus, your equating the knowledge of an imam to the knowledge of a Prophet is in essence giving an imam the status of a Prophet.

"WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO THIS REVELATIONAL KNOWLEDGE."

which is exactly what i said in my previous post...

But you stated previously that:

shi'as believe that the prophet (saw) and the imams have a more complete knowledge (yaqeen) of the consequences of sin and the concept of sinning becomes preposterous for them because of that

The Quran uses this type of knowledge as REVELATIONAL knowledge. It is precisely because a Prophet (AS) has been granted revelation that he (S) has more complete knowledge.

Whether this knowledge was transmitted through Jibraeel (AS) or another medium is irrelevant.

not every son of an imam is an imam, which is why we have ismailis and zaydis... i will offer some qur'anic references to explain further if you need more clarification.. but, really, that last statement seems purposely obtuse... not every child of a blonde(/pick your genetic trait) parent is blonde

I was not the one making the analogy. You argue that the condition of imamate was because of 'essence', but this is not the case according to the Quran. Further, whenever God Almighty states that He has blessed a Prophet (AS) with revelation through his descendants, He, the Most High, clearly states that it is because of Him FAVORING that Prophet (AS). It has nothing to do with essence.

So if it has nothing to do with essence regarding Prophets (AS), than how can you claim it for imams?

you seem to be misunderstanding me... (granted i do have a tendency towards brevity so perhaps that's why)

"1. Revelation is not confined to Jibraeel (AS)."

what i meant was that only prophets can hear Jibraeel's voice (i.e. imams cannot)... not that Jibraeel was the only medium for revelation

"WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO THIS REVELATIONAL KNOWLEDGE."

which is exactly what i said in my previous post...

"So what the son of Nuh (AS) of the same essence as his father (AS) from a metaphysical point of view?"

not every son of an imam is an imam, which is why we have ismailis and zaydis... i will offer some qur'anic references to explain further if you need more clarification.. but, really, that last statement seems purposely obtuse... not every child of a blonde(/pick your genetic trait) parent is blonde


ps how do you bold your font?

To clear it up a little, the Prophet and Imams have two essential roles. The Prophet's purpose was to accurately deliver the message and the Imams collective purpose was to maintain that message in its pure form.


The Quran makes it incumbent on ALL MUSLIMS to stand for the truth. This is not exclusive to the imams. Further, the Quran clearly states that the ummah are 'witnesses of truth unto mankind'. So once again, if this is in no way, according to the Quran, confined to a certain elect, where do you get this idea from?

Further, the Quran, as even all shia testify, has been protected by Allah through the WHOLE ummah, not just the imams. So once again, where does the idea of imamate being 'protectors of the message come from'?

As regards Husain (R), that is a separate discussion all to itself. But in summary, there have been countless cases in history where pious people have stood for the truth, and layed down their lives. This is precisely what it means to be a SHAHEED.

How is this exclusive to an imam?

In terms of their infallibilty? no i don't think there is a difference... however, what distinguishes the prophet from the imams is the fact that jibreel only speaks to the prophet and that only the prophet's word comes from divine inspiration/revelation...

1. Revelation is not confined to Jibraeel (AS). Musa (AS) spoke to Allah behind a veil. Allah grants his Prophets (AS) direct inspiration also. Their visions, such as the dream where the Prophet (S) witnessed his followers and he were entering the Kaaba with his followers WAS PART OF REVELATION.

2. Prophets have been granted SOME knowledge of the unseen, and they convey the truths of the unseen to us, including the nature of the sin in the next life. WE BELIEVE that whatever they say regarding the unseen is truth, precisely because they have been granted manifest signs THAT CONFIRM HIS TRUTH. WE HAVE NO ACCESS TO THIS REVELATIONAL KNOWLEDGE.

Musa (AS) was granted Nine great signs which established his prophethood. But never were his followers granted access to the revelational experiences he (S) had. The Israelites were required to affirm what the Prophet Musa (AS) said DESPITE SEEING NOT SEEING THESE REALITIES.

This is the FUNDAMENTAL BELIEF IN PROPHETHOOD.

What you assert is that Imams have access to a specific knowledge which grants them a certain authority in respect to shareeah.

Thus, as I stated before, there is in actuality no difference between a Prophet and Imam according to this idea.

You argue that the infallibility of an imam is because of AN EXCLUSIVE knowledge, and this is precisely what it means to be a Prophet.

from a metaphysical point of view, the essence of the prophet and the imams is the same (hence the emphasis on heredity) while their purposes for being differ.. (i.e. the prophet has a higher purpose)

So what the son of Nuh (AS) of the same essence as his father (AS) from a metaphysical point of view?

will inshallah respond to your post soon... just a large amount to respond to...

Yes, in terms of isma or infallibility, they are the same. How could they be different? Both prophets and imams don't make mistakes, is the shia belief. There are no levels, you either make mistakes or you don't.

To clear it up a little, the Prophet and Imams have two essential roles. The Prophet's purpose was to accurately deliver the message and the Imams collective purpose was to maintain that message in its pure form. Shias believe that without Imam Husayn's (AS) sacrifice, the message of Islam would never have been maintained in its true form. He did not fight out of a desire to, in fact, he tried to avoid it at all costs. He fought after continuously urging Yazeed and his army to desist, to come back to the true path his grandfather had shown them, and who better to do such a thing than the grandson of the Prophet? The soldiers of Yazeed's army were seen weeping from Husayn's words. But they were continually led astray by Umar Sa'ad and the other leaders of the army and told to silence anyone who spoke against the Khaleefa.

It was no secret that Yazeed drank alcohol and had dancing girls openly. If this was the Khaleefa of the time representing Islam, I ask you, would you sit as a just person and do nothing?

in terms of their infallibilty? no i don't think there is a difference... however, what distinguishes the prophet from the imams is the fact that jibreel only speaks to the prophet and that only the prophet's word comes from divine inspiration/revelation...

from a metaphysical point of view, the essence of the prophet and the imams is the same (hence the emphasis on heredity) while their purposes for being differ.. (i.e. the prophet has a higher purpose)

Last time I checked, it is Prophets who are granted revelation BY SIGHT and CONVEY these realities to their followers. So, sya for example when Rasool (S) went on his journey of Miraaj he conveyed to his ummah the situation of a 'back-biter' in a manner we could comprehend. It is part of our belief in the Rasool THAT WE AFFIRM THIS REALITIES OF THE UNSEEN.

So what you are really saying is their is no distinction between an Imam and a Prophet (AS)?

Actually, the knowledge of the ill effects of a sin are not exclusive to a Prophet (AS). Human beings in general know the ill-effects of sin through the Quran, and moral conscience.

the point is, there is a difference between knowing and being told... the avoidance of sin from the imams can be compared to a doctor eating right and exercising... we all "know" we should eat healthy, but it's the doctor who really knows all the consequences (and has probably witnessed most of them)

shi'as believe that the prophet (saw) and the imams have a more complete knowledge (yaqeen) of the consequences of sin and the concept of sinning becomes preposterous for them because of that

(i'm enjoying this debate! please keep it coming)

He replied because I know it is bad and unhealthy for me, filled with things I can't even imagine and it will not quench my thirst... the Imam replied, and this is the knowledge which I have, which is the reason I will never sin. This is 'isma or infallibility.

Actually, the knowledge of the ill effects of a sin are not exclusive to a Prophet (AS). Human beings in general know the ill-effects of sin through the Quran, and moral conscience.

If this isn't exclusive to the Prophets (AS), than how do you define it as infallibility?

And we are to believe that the Sahabah were greater political strategists than the Prophet? When the Sahabah closest to him showed the most doubt?

Please... this is just silly.

The Prophet (S) was not a POLITICAL startegist. He was a Messenger of God. If he (S) was a political strategist he would not have accepted the Treaty of Hudaybia, nor would he (S) have told his followers to face Jerusalem for prayers while in Mecca.

All of these events, all of these incidents, according to the Quran were PART OF REVELATION.

None of these incidents have anything to do with aspects where the Companions (R) spoke their mind in regards to consultation. Are you saying that the Quran commanded the Prophet (S) to take consultation among the Companions (R) for the reason of simply satisfying their urge to speak their opinion?

If the Quran did not recognize the value of the opinion of the Sahabah (R), why do you think the Quran told the Propet (S) to seek consultation in the affairs?

Michael Hart in his book "The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History" ranks Prophet Muhammad (swawm) as #1 citing the fact that he was the only person in history to bring about social AND political change on such a grand scale with such a lasting effect. Was he giving the credit to the wrong person?

What does this have to do with my point? NOBODY IS NEGATING THE PROPHET'S ABILITY TO LEAD. The very revolution the Prophet (S) brought was performed with the help of REVELATION, meaning He (S) was ASSISTED BY GOD. Whatever was needed for this aspect of HIS REVELATION was God-given. BUT IN THOSE MATTERS WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS ASPECT, people may have more knowledge.

I don't thing mistakes are exactly the essence of humanity, or even an important ingredient.

Actually, it is the FUNDAMENTAL INGREDIENT. This is precisely why, in the FIRST STORY OF MAN, God Almighty recounts the story of Adam (AS) and his REPENTANCE. This is directly contrasted to the lack of repentance by Shaytan. Further, the Quran clearly states that once Adam (AS) had felt shame, God TAUGHT Adam (AS) words to repent with, and further honored him with guidance.

THE IDEA OF REPENTANCE IS SO INTEGRAL TO THE STORY OF MAN, THAT TO NEGATE IT WOULD BE NEGATING ISLAM, and in fact moving towards the direction of Christianity in its conception of mistakes and sin.

Will you then not recognize what humanity is? Is it perhaps the love of a grandson? To give a child this simple happiness? Could you not write chapters and chapters about what humanity is in this simple act of Our Prophet?

How does this negate my point? What relevance does this have to the idea of infallibility of a Prophet (AS)? How does this beautiful instance of a Prophet's (S) NATURAL affection for his grandson negate my point? The two instances are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

"This is a plausible argument but not a compelling one. So does this mean there were times that the Prophet (swawm) uttered the words of the Qur'an incorrectly or could have and Allah corrected him? Where is this recorded? This does not seem to be the best way of transmission of God's Word. Why do you feel that a human being guided directly by God cannot perform his duties on Earth as a human with free will infallibly?"

As I stated, the idea of INFALLIBILITY has everything to do with the DELIVERANCE OF THE MESSAGE. The Quran has protected this in totality. No single dot, no word, no ayah, is subject to any mistake with regards to the Prophet (S). But this does not entail that a Prophet (S) cannot make a mistake. If a Prophet (S) makes a mistake IN HIS ACTIONS, God corrects him.

Why do you think in surah Ahzab, the Quran states to the Prophet (S) that:

"God was making clear what you were hiding in your heart?"

The verse had not been revealed regarding the divorce of Zayd (R), but the Prophet (S) was already having an inclination that it was about to be revealed. Yet, he (S) told Zayd (R) to fear Allah, and retain Zaynab (R) in marriage. THAN THE ALMIGHTY REVEALED A VERSE, OF WHICH THE PROPHET (S) PROCLAIMED IMMEDIATELY.

This shows that God corrects a Prophet (S) in his actions, AT TEH SAME TIME preserving te integrity message. "Do not be hasty with respect to this Quran. It is for us to reveal it."

When the Quran points to the mistake of Yunus (AS), why do you give me a STORY of Jafer bin Sadeq (R)? If Adam (AS) ate from the tree, and he (R) spoke to Allah, than why do you provide me with STORIES about people who are in no way equivalent to these Prophets (AS)?

WHY IS IT WHEN I QUOTE CLEAR MISTAKES OF PROPHETS IN THE QURAN YOU PEOPLE CONTINUE TO GIVE LONG-DRAWN OUT EXPLANATIONS?

You than bring up the issue of the Treaty of Hudaybia, as if this contradicts my point. BUT YOU FAIL TO REALIZE THAT THE TREATY WAS MADE EXPLICITLY BY THE REVELATION OF THE PROPHET (S). It had nothing to do with the issue of consultation and in fact, it DOES NOT IN A SINGLE IOTA contradict the story of Badr. In fact, the SUMMARY of the story leaves out the explicit portion of Umar (R) going to the Prophet (S) and putting similar questions that he had just posed to Abu Bakr (R). It was here that the Prohet (S) exclaimed that it was done by the revelation of Allah. This settled the heart of Umar (R), but he still regretted his actions.

SO ARE YOU GOING TO CONTINUALLY GIVE ME STORIES, WHEN I AM GIVING YOU THE QURAN?

hey Shia Psychopath, would have loved to read ONE line for u in ur journal "Sunni version of mut'ah"!!! WHAT? FORGOT YOU EVEN WROTE IT?????? LOOOOOL

i'll comment on this silly Shaltut journal later, soon.

hey Shia Psychopath, would have loved to read ONE line for u in ur journal "Sunni version of mut'ah"!!! WHAT? FORGOT YOU EVEN WROTE IT?????? LOOOOOL

i'll visit this silly Shaltut journal soon :D