ভূমিকা

Shiavault - a Vault of Shia Islamic Books Explanation To the Belief of Mahdism in Shia Imamia E. Not a Correct Analysis The religious matters are viewed from both a material and political dimension. For instance, they say that the Shia did not see things to their advantage, therefore they refused to yield to the caliphate and choose a different way. The prime error that entails several other subsequent errors is that they do not consider Shiasm a religious reality or an entity of a belief.

They regard it as a political phenomenon. The writer says that it gathered support as people joined the movement even though at times it was given different names. The name of AFILUL BAIT (The Prophet's household) gave them a push. As time advanced they too advanced. But this theory is wrong. The existence of the Shia belief has no relation to any historical episode. The writer considers historical events as a proud for the birth of the Shia thought. Likewise the Sunni.

The writer struggles his way through such blunders till he reaches the occultation (the disappearance) of the twelfth Imam, Mahdi. Amidst the conditions and circumstances he sees the gleam of reason. The mist rises and he sees the light! There has always been this fact - that people will mingle in political events or take no part in the governmental posts, or oppose openly, or flouting a proposal, or scouting an idea.

But, in no way could this have a link will a religion, as a religion can not be founded or established or propagated on such a ground. According to some narration, the disappearance of Mahdi happened in order that some could avoid the obligation of yielding to his authority. However, such a thing has happened, has taken place, has occurred. It is a fact. It is a reality.

It is a tyrannical conjecture or a wounding lies, that the Shia had no other way but to switch their belief in such an event after the death of the eleventh Imam, Hasan Askari. One, who is a stranger to religions, is totally ignorant to the realities of the invisible or unseen world, who has seen only matter or any other tangible thing; he wants to see, justify and even interpret the religious matters, no matter of its magnitude, and then decide or pass judgment.

Every thing he thinks is the effect of a cause or a policy in a political class. Similar is the argument of Marxists too. Such should be, because of no acquaintance, no awareness.